NSF Undergoes Major Overhaul: Grants Canceled, DEI Division Eliminated, and Staff Restructuring
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is experiencing a significant transformation, driven by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), leading to the cancellation of numerous grants, the elimination of its Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM, significant staff reductions, and a return-to-office mandate for remote employees. These changes mark a considerable shift in the agency’s priorities and operations, sparking debate and concern within the scientific community.
Multiple sources with direct knowledge of the changes confirm that dozens of additional grants were canceled on May 9, marking the third wave of terminations to impact the agency in recent weeks. In total, the NSF has halted more than 1,400 projects, representing a staggering $1 billion in funding, according to a public list maintained by researchers at science nonprofit rOpenSci and Harvard University. The breadth and scale of these cancellations underscore the magnitude of the changes underway at the NSF.
The NSF also announced the elimination of its Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM team. This division was responsible for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in STEM fields by removing barriers and supporting the full participation of underrepresented groups in science and engineering. The removal of this division and its functions signals a potential shift away from prioritizing DEI initiatives within the agency’s funding and programs. The agency even took down the Equity for Excellence in STEM’s webpage.
Furthermore, the NSF is implementing significant staff reductions. A staff memo reveals that approximately 70 employees are being laid off, and around 300 temporary positions are being eliminated. These job losses will undoubtedly impact the agency’s capacity to support scientific research and related activities. In addition to the layoffs, employees who have been working remotely for years are now required to return to the NSF’s headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, by June 16. This return-to-office mandate may present challenges for employees and could potentially impact the agency’s overall productivity.
The Department of Government Efficiency has publicly stated that many of the terminated grants were deemed "wasteful DEI" funding. These terminations align with a 2024 report published by Texas Senator Ted Cruz, which identified projects he argued had been "politicized." These observations, from DOGE and Senator Cruz, highlight the ongoing debate surrounding the role of DEI initiatives in scientific research and the potential for political influence on funding decisions.
Adding to the upheaval within the agency, the NSF’s director, Sethuraman Panchanathan, abruptly resigned from his position late last month. Panchanathan was appointed to lead the agency during the Trump administration and was responsible for overseeing the distribution of billions of dollars in nonmedical scientific research funding. His sudden departure raises questions about the circumstances surrounding his resignation and the potential impact on the agency’s future direction.
In late April, staff members from the Department of Government Efficiency visited the NSF headquarters, according to multiple NSF employees. Shortly after this visit, the agency announced it would adjust its priorities to eliminate awards "with more narrow impact limited to subgroups of people based on protected class or characteristics," including those related to "diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and misinformation/disinformation." This statement suggests a move towards funding projects with broader societal impact and away from those focused on specific demographic groups or addressing issues related to DEI or misinformation.
The changes at the NSF have generated significant concern within the scientific community. Many researchers and advocates fear that the grant cancellations and the elimination of the DEI division will have a detrimental impact on scientific progress and the representation of underrepresented groups in STEM. The reduction in funding could stifle innovation and limit opportunities for researchers, particularly those from marginalized communities.
Moreover, the shift away from DEI initiatives may perpetuate existing inequalities in STEM fields and undermine efforts to create a more inclusive and diverse scientific workforce. The long-term consequences of these changes remain to be seen, but they could potentially have a lasting impact on the NSF’s role in supporting scientific research and promoting diversity in STEM.
The situation at the NSF is evolving, and the full extent of the changes and their impact on the scientific community is yet to be determined. As the agency navigates this period of transformation, it will be crucial to monitor the effects of these decisions on scientific research, diversity in STEM, and the NSF’s overall mission to advance scientific progress and benefit society. The debate surrounding these changes highlights the importance of striking a balance between ensuring responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars and promoting scientific innovation and inclusivity. The future of the NSF, and its role in shaping the scientific landscape, hangs in the balance.
