WASHINGTON, DC — A proposed rule from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is seeking to overhaul the uniform guidance for federal grantees. The rule would deemphasize the peer-review process, requiring grants to fall in line with administration priorities and be signed off on by political appointees. The initiative comes as morale among federal researchers, especially at VA, is reportedly at an all-time low due after 2 years of hiring freezes and staff cuts.
Should it go into effect, the new language would reshape grant regulations to reflect President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting diversity initiatives and other “woke” causes.
“Federal grants funded unlawful DEI practices, various anti-American ideologies in American education, non-replicable and highly misleading studies, labs engaged in gain-of-function research, and AI-powered social media censorship tools,” OMB wrote in its executive summary of the proposed rule. “Grantmaking practices resulting in wasteful spending that became prevalent during the previous administration can only be stopped through adherence to strong internal controls at federal agencies.”
Deeper in the proposed rule, OMB states, “Discretionary awards must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities.”
The proposal, published in late May, received nearly a half-million comments, most of them being overwhelmingly negative.
“I don’t think, in my time that I’ve been privileged to serve in the Senate, that I have seen a rule, a proposed rule, generate that many negative comments,” declared Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME).
Her comments were made during a floor debate on the stopgap measure seeking to fund the government through the end of the year. The Senate version of the bill includes a provision temporarily blocking the OMB rule. Collins and others have called for some sections to be removed from the bill, while Democrats have called for it to be rescinded entirely.
The stopgap funding bill passed the Senate easily but still awaits a vote in the House, which will not reconvene until after Labor Day.
Meanwhile, lawmakers are still trying to measure the impact of last year’s staffing cuts and hiring freeze on researchers at VA.
“On the very first day of the Trump administration, all VA research staff became subject to a hiring freeze and probationary firings. As a result, research at the Pittsburgh VA to predict stroke risk was put on hold, enrollment into clinical trials for advanced cancer was delayed, and a clinical trial in Florida on preventing dementia and heart disease was cancelled,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) said during a Senate VA Committee hearing examining the state of VA research. “The department also enforced vacancy cuts and staffing caps on its facilities. Though these cuts technically exclude research staff, a study at a VA site in the Pacific Northwest was delayed because staffing caps prevented them from hiring nurses who were needed to administer that study.”
According to Murray, VA researchers are reporting that startup times for studies can stretch to over a year and that hiring a new staff member often takes up to 6 months.
“A planned study on RSV missed its enrollment window and could not even enroll participants,” Murray declared. “Another clinical trial closed after it took six months to hire a researcher. The study’s principal investigator and its lead clinician both resigned from the VA after this debacle.”
The proposed OMB rule amounts to “one final blow to research,” she said. “That doesn’t make sense—letting political appointees overrule the scientist on what research is worth pursuing and funding.”
Glenn Graham, MD, former executive director of VA’s neurology clinical service, left VA in September 2025. He told the committee that before he left “staff were more upset and distracted and anxious than I have ever seen in my career.”
“Our researchers were concerned with hiring delays, with attrition of staff, particularly support staff which could be laboratory staff or clinical support or research office staff, as well with increased demands on physicians to devote themselves just to the clinical demands of VA and not get time for research,” Graham said.
There was also a pervasive fear of job loss, with staff fearing that, if they didn’t leave voluntarily, they would be pushed out during another reduction in force wave.
“When there were opportunities to take early retirement, there were good folks we lost in the organization. They were afraid if they didn’t take that option, they would be RIFed and they would have nothing,” Graham said.
This kind of pervasive fear is especially harmful in a healthcare environment, where distractions can result in patient harm, Graham told lawmakers. “In a healthcare organization, it’s very important that you have psychological safety, that you be a high reliability organization. You need to feel safe to report errors, to report potential areas where inefficiencies occur and harm can occur. In a context where people are more afraid of losing their job or being reprimanded or scapegoated, that doesn’t foster a culture of safety.”
