Two recent attempts by the federal government to halt or reduce the disbursement of federal funding have prompted responses from the University of South Carolina and concern among students.
In January, a White House memo announced a pause to federal financial assistance. While it was later rescinded, some students say that its effects linger.
Less than two weeks after the funding freeze was first announced, the NIH enacted a uniform cap on funding for indirect research costs, which was halted by a federal judge while a legal challenge is heard. The cap would reduce the amount of money that USC receives to conduct medical research. The NIH made this announcement the same month the university broke ground on a new medical school.
National Institute of Health indirect cost rate
On Feb. 7, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a cap of 15% for indirect costs rate for its research grants.
These rates, which are negotiated between research institutions and the government, cover administrative and facilities costs.
The cap was halted by a temporary restraining order from a federal judge, which followed a lawsuit against the NIH from the American Association of Medical Colleges and several other plaintiffs. The lawsuit states that enacting this cap was "unlawful."
The planned funding cap could affect USC’s competitiveness as an institution, according to Janice Probst, a former associate director of the Rural & Minority Health Research Center in the Arnold School of Public Health.
Probst used an analogy of baking a cake to describe what indirect costs are. While ingredients such as eggs, sugar and flour are required for making the cake, a baker also needs space, an oven and electricity. The non-ingredient items would be the indirect costs in a research context, she said.
According to the federal announcement, this rate has averaged between 27% and 28%, with some organizations using a rate of over 60%. These rates do not match the maximum rates for private foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has a cap of 10% for grants to higher education institutions, the announcement read.
Probst also has a personal connection to the issue. Her nine-year-old great-nephew has stage four neuroblastoma, a type of cancer common in children. After looking into who was treating him, Probst found that the research behind his treatment was funded by the National Cancer Institute, a component of the NIH.
“So if you say ‘We’re gonna cut NIH funding because we think they’re wasting money,’ you come to me and tell me that,” Probst said. “I, who have a little kid with no hair right now.”
NIH awards are USC’s largest source of federal assistance, and funding for indirect costs supports critical research infrastructure, Julius Fridricksonn, vice president for research at USC, wrote in a Feb. 10 letter.
According to the NIH’s website, the University of South Carolina received $70,314,467 in funding from the institute in 2024.
“We are hopeful that the reduction in funds could prove temporary,” Fridricksonn wrote in the letter. “However, we are planning for any eventuality and remain committed to growing our future health research endeavors.”
According to data from the magazine Newsweek, the state of South Carolina would have lost over $33 million in research funding in 2024 if the 15% cap had been applied that year. But Probst believes the true number could be between $36 and $53 million per year, especially if other sources of federal grants follow suit.
On Feb. 25 the university broke ground on a new school of medicine. Speaking to reporters at the ceremony, Thad Westbrook, chair of USC’s board of trustees, said the new cap will not hamper the university’s ongoing medical projects.
“It doesn’t slow down what we’re doing right now with both medical education and research,” Westbrook said.
Westbrook would like to see the funding cap increased, especially for public institutions. Compared to private institutions, public universities like USC do not have as large endowments, he said.
USC President Michael Amiridis said that the university does not know what the result will be.
“At this point I hope that this will be reconsidered and the percentages will change,” Amridis said.
The university has told its researchers to continue their work while applying for new federal funding opportunities, according to a statement from University Spokesperson Collyn Taylor.
According to the statement, USC officials are advocating for the university’s research to local, state and federal governing bodies.
“We have a government relations team that’s been working with the federal government and our federal delegation,” Westbrook said. “They’re very plugged in and in tune with what’s going on. I think we’re going to have a conversation for several months about this.”
The rescinded funding freeze memo
The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a memo on Jan. 27 stating all federal financial assistance and funding was to be temporarily paused. This pause would officially go into effect Jan. 28 at 5 p.m.
The memo stated that federal agencies must do a comprehensive analysis of their federal financial assistance programs and pause any related activities. The memo also stated that agencies such as the Green New Deal, DEI, foreign aid and nongovernmental organizations must also comply.
Agencies affected by this memo would have until Feb. 10 to submit detailed information on programs, activities and projects that could be affected.
In a statement to the university, Fridriksson stated it will be closely tracking this situation and will keep those affected informed.
According to AP News a federal judge then blocked this memo just minutes before it was supposed to go into effect.
Lawsuits from non-profit organizations that receive federal money prompted the blockage, according to AP News. The OMB then sent out another memo Jan. 29 stating the first one was rescinded.
Fourth-year environmental science major Lily Bosch was involved in a microbial lab and is now working on a project about North Atlantic right whales and the correlation between media coverage and public policy.
Bosch said the memo has affected her postgraduate plans, as she wanted to work for a year at the federal level before applying for graduate school. Due to federal cuts, Bosch said that her potential career jobs are unstable, which is disheartening to her.
“There's so many job cuts on the federal level ... Just things kind of being completely turned upside down,” Bosch said.
According to a statement from Taylor, the university will take appropriate actions that align with state and federal laws but are also in the best interest of students and faculty.
Fourth year marine science student and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Hollings Scholar Ainsley Cain has worked in a lab studying phytoplankton and conducted her own research for the Hollings program about the Pacific halibut.
Cain said there was a lot of panic within the Hollings Scholars when the memo was first sent.
“There's a GroupMe that has a bunch of us Hollings Scholars in it, and we're all texting like, ‘What does this mean for us’ ... So there's kind of just ... Genuine panic,” Cain said.
As a Hollings Scholars, Cain said she receives two payments a semester for her scholarship. The first one for this semester was set to come in at the end of January, right around the time the memo was first released.
NOAA falls under the Department of Commerce, but Cain is considered to be on the education side of NOAA. However, her scholarship had the potential to be impacted if the memo had gone through, Cain said.
Cain said she did receive her scholarship money after the memo was rescinded, but is still seeing the memo affect the Hollings Scholars program..
According to the Washington Post, The National Science Foundation (NSF) has taken down and reviewed thousands of science research projects in order to meet President Trump's executive order that was released during his first week in office. With that, NSF has looked through a list of keywords in order to determine if any projects violate the executive order, according to the Washington Post. NSF must provide justification if they believe a flagged keyword does not go against the executive order.
“Us Hollings Scholars can post a ... Blog excerpt about our project (and) they’ve taken all of those down to review them to be compliant with Trump's executive orders ... It's still been a little weird adjusting,” Cain said.
Fourth-year marine science student Madison Essex first got involved in research her sophomore year where she was a part of the Magellan Journey Program and later marine policy research. Essex now has her own independent study where she looks at the effects of climate change on fish.
Essex said she still does some work in the marine policy lab and has noticed changes made in order to comply with the memo. She said the lab has had to adjust how marine policy issues are handled due to the potential of them being blocked or not being allowed to be proposed again.
“We have to be really careful now with the wording ... We’ve taken a lot of proposals back so that we can edit them and or hold off...so we can eventually propose them again, but the world of marine policy is very scary right now,” Essex said.
Essex said while her own personal research hasn’t been affected, she feels uncertain about her future post-graduation.
“Coming in, professors were always saying to you ... ‘Climate jobs, environmental jobs, they're going to be really necessary in the next couple years,’” Essex said. “‘You guys are going to be one of the most high demand jobs to have’, and now it feels like it's kind of not the case.”
Essex said she can see how much this will impact incoming students for the next few years, because there will be a lack of opportunities for students wanting to pursue research. While most internships and entry level work are unpaid, opportunities for paid and funded independent research could become limited in an already expensive field, Essex said.
“They're definitely going to have to fight a lot harder for their opportunities," Essex said. "It's going to become a lot more challenging for them to break through in this field."
Bosch said while she considers herself lucky to not be affected as much as others, she does see others waiting for answers.
“I'm just learning a lot about how tied science (and) the federal government are because you think that they're very separate, we're kind of seeing that they're not,” Bosch said.