In a campaign video, current United States President Donald Trump stated the following: “Colleges have gotten hundreds of billions of dollars from hard-working taxpayers. And now we are going to get this anti-American insanity out of our institutions once and for all. We are going to have real education in America.” In the first few months of Trump’s second term, assessing higher education has become an administration priority–aided by the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Over the past few months, the administration has sent out executive orders to cut various universities’ federal funding, including $400 million from Columbia, $175 million from the University of Pennsylvania, and $200 million from Johns Hopkins. The administration is also continuously targeting grants for smaller universities, including programs related to scientific research, teacher and professor education, diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), and local elementary and middle school enrichment.
The administration has sent out executive orders to cut various universities’ federal funding, including $400 million from Columbia, $175 million from the University of Pennsylvania, and $200 million from Johns Hopkins.
On January 31st, Rhode Island judge John McConnell Jr. ruled to temporarily block the administration’s efforts to freeze congressionally approved federal loans and grants through a temporary restraining order. McConnell released a statement that alleged that the administration was overstepping its legal boundaries by continuing to freeze grants two weeks following the ruling.
On February 28th, the U.S. Department for Health and Human Services (HHS) released a policy statement that announced the rescinding of the Richardson Waiver–a policy that required public opinion hearings for proposed changes to rules about grants, loans, and contracts, among other administrative operations. The Michigan Health & Hospital Association speculated that the rescinding of the act makes it “easier to change policies without consulting the public or affected stakeholders.” Other influential associations, such as the American Bar Association, commented that “Advocacy groups warn that the shift may lead to regulatory changes without sufficient stakeholder engagement.”
On March 6th, Judge McConnell approved a preliminary injunction, a court order that temporarily preserves the status quo, in another attempt to block the Trump administration’s freezing of federal grants–at least until the case is settled.
Dr. Mark Zachary Taylor, a Georgia Tech public policy professor with a focus on science and technology policy and the American presidency, stated, “There has been nothing like this in 170 years, at least not as far as the attacks on science and technology.”
The administration began imposing policies that would cap reimbursement rates for indirect costs for National Institute of Health (NIH) research grants at 15%.
Beyond attempting to rescind federal grants, on February 9, the administration began imposing policies that would cap reimbursement rates for indirect costs for National Institute of Health (NIH) research grants at 15%. These indirect costs – commonly referred to as Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs – go towards overhead funding, which is operational funding for research programs. For some universities and research institutions, entire research programs have been cut due to preemptive university decisions that the research programs are no longer feasible given the potential loss of F&A funds. On March 5th, federal judge Angel Kelly blocked the imposition of the 15% cap on F&A, but the administration has continued to focus on the NIH by attempting to freeze NIH-related grants.
Georgia Tech distributes the F&A funds reimbursed by the federal government towards paying for operation and maintenance, equipment, and utilities, among other indirect categories. Out of every one dollar that Georgia Tech receives from the federal government, twenty-three cents are distributed to indirect costs. This means that if the policies stood, Georgia Tech would not be reimbursed for the 8-cent-per-dollar difference between the federal cap and the institutional budget. Although changes to overhead funding may not seem significant, Dr. Taylor explained that “There is research that needs to be maintained and tended to on a weekly, daily, even hourly basis. If there’s no funding to pay for chemicals, or labs, or technicians, or RAs, then that research gets shelved,” which could potentially scrap money that has already been spent. According to Georgia Tech, the Institute has been receiving all money as previously agreed upon, and that will likely continue due to the judicial blockage of the F&A cap. Vice President of Research for Georgia Tech, Dr. Tim Lieuwen, stated that as he understands it, “There will not be attempts to reduce F&A, although it may come back up as a part of a new budget process.” He is not anticipating a large change in the next few months akin to the administration’s NIH policy movements in February, although Dr. Lieuwen stated that it is “in play for [Georgia Tech] to be thinking about a new model for F&A.”
“There will not be attempts to reduce F&A, although it may come back up as a part of a new budget process.”
As well as attempting to freeze university grants, various notices regarding previously contracted work have been sent out from both federal government contractors as well as private and state contractors. These orders focus primarily on DEI, green-energy projects, and foreign aid. Georgia Tech has over 3,550 active contracts, and as of February 27, 2025, there have only been nineteen notices sent out to various research programs in the university. The two types of notices that have been sent out to Georgia Tech are Cease Non-Compliant Activities notices and Stop Work Orders.
The twelve Cease Non-Compliant Activities notices focused on specific work strains within overarching programs that were non-compliant with the executive orders. The notices sent to Georgia Tech came from governmental agencies, including the DOE, NSF, NIH, and NASA. These notices are tangential, meaning they did not attempt to affect entire programs. As of February 27, 2025, Georgia Tech has advised students and faculty that unless a specific Stop-Work Order has been issued to the program, all work can continue.
The seven Stop-Work Orders focus directly on the termination of entire research projects. Four of them come directly from the federal government – specifically, three from the Department of State and USAID, and one from FEMA. The other three were preemptive measures from various subcontractors of the federal government.
As of March 19, 2024, three orders have been reinstated and research has been resumed. Although Dr. Lieuwen acknowledges the pain that comes with the cancellation of projects, he stressed that “at this point, we’re in a pretty strong position.”
Typical government grants with Georgia Tech rarely last longer than three years and most industry-funded work grants are renewed annually. Due to that, faculty and departments are well-versed in managing transitions in funding. Likewise, according to Dr. Lieuwen, Georgia Tech has continued to accept proposals, and more grants are coming in. The Institute is also focused on improving risk and scenario planning. Georgia Tech has a reserve fund for lapses in funding, but is seeking to further develop its precautionary measures.
Although Dr. Lieuwen said that it is possible that the number of new projects coming in the long-term may be reduced, to him, the past few months have meant “Game on.” Dr. Lieuwen stated, “One piece where we can really emerge stronger is – there is a fraction of our population that [doesn’t] see universities and research universities as being beneficial to them, and so to me, that’s a challenge.” Dr Taylor argued for the importance of focusing on the Trump Administration’s effects on science and technology in a broader sense, and gave these words of advice to concerned students: “Be patient, be vocal, be peaceful, and let your legislators know.”
