Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: Federal agencies must ensure that public research funds advance lawful program goals and protect participants. Recent changes in federal grant oversight raise a different question: when does legitimate stewardship become interference in the science of a grant already approved through peer review? A 2025 executive order expanded political appointees’ review of discretionary grants and a 2026 proposed rule would broaden authority to end awards midstream, and This commentary reviews the legal framework for ending grants; examines tensions between priority setting and study design, oversight and political preference, and flexibility and stability; and proposes four guardrails: continuity for compliant awards, written rationales, independent scientific review, and proportionate termination procedures. These guardrails can preserve democratic accountability without sacrificing scientific independence.
Source: Health Affairs Scholar
Author: Sarah Moreland-Russell
Institution: Washington University in St. Louis
Language: English
Subfield: Information Systems and Management
Field: Decision Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $3,150
Funder: National Institutes of Health
OpenAlex ID: W7222208574
FWCI:
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: