A Michigan research professor explains how NIH funding works − and what it means to suddenly lose a grant
The effects of these cuts are being felt at top-tier public research institutions such as the University of Michigan. In fiscal year 2024, of the $2 billion in total research expenditures at the university, $1.2 billion came in through federal research grants, with $762 million from NIH alone.
Brady West is a research professor at the University of Michigan who has been writing federal grant proposals for more than two decades. The Conversation U.S. spoke with him about what these cuts could mean for the university and scientific research in the U.S. going forward.
This article is adapted from an interview Brady gave for the May 1 episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast.
The University of Michigan's research arm includes 'soft money' institutes. What does that mean?
Brady West: A soft money institute is one where the salaries are entirely funded by the research grants and contracts that they're able to obtain. This is the case for most of the research arm of the University of Michigan, which includes the Institute for Social Research where I work. The university sets the salary amounts for these positions, and the people filling them − whether faculty, staff or graduate students − have to raise the money to fund their salary.
Teaching faculty, on the other hand, usually are paid from general university funds, which might come in from sources such as tuition, rather than grant funding.
What is involved in applying for a grant from a federal institution like NIH?
West: In my experience, it's an extremely competitive and stressful process.
On average, I would estimate that it takes about a year to craft a research proposal from scratch. Applicants do background research, look at all the relevant work that has already been done in the field, summarize the articles that they've written, and sometimes do initial preliminary studies. They have to sell their research as connected to past work but still innovative, something that will move the science forward.
Meanwhile, they're working with a team of research administrators, whose jobs at the university are funded by soft money, on things like creating a budget and determining what sort of supplies, equipment and additional personnel will be required for the research project. These administrators also help the applicant format and submit the proposal.
How does NIH determine what proposals receive funding?
West: Every proposal submitted to NIH gets reviewed by a panel of experts in that particular field, so your peers are the ones reviewing your proposal and deciding whether it should be considered for funding.
Each panel is tasked with reviewing and scoring multiple proposals. About half of the proposals receive scores that do not warrant additional discussion for funding. The rest are scrutinized line by line.
Those with the best scores, based on their merits as well as agency budgets and priorities, are ultimately awarded grants. All applicants are sent the reviewers' comments, and those not receiving funding may revise their proposal and resubmit. In my experience, few applications get funded the first time they are submitted, and most go through at least one round of revisions.
I've found it generally takes about two years from the time you start writing a proposal to the time that you get funded.
When did you learn that NIH and other federal grants were being rescinded at the University of Michigan?
West: The first notice I received was in mid-February of 2025. I was wrapping up a federally funded study where we were looking at different ways of measuring sexual identity in surveys. That study was funded by a $160,000 grant from NIH.
I received a notice from administrators for the National Center for Health Statistics – part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – that maintains the data I was working with. The email said my work was being reviewed for compliance with the president's executive orders and would be paused.
I was lucky, because that particular grant was set to end at the end of February, so the project was nearly finished, and the paper was already written.
And then over the following weeks, it was like a waterfall. I started hearing from colleagues who were working on grants related to climate change, vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, sexual identity, gender identity, DEI – all of the work related to that, I just heard story after story of these grants being ended on the spot.
What does this mean for the researchers who lost their funding? What will they do now?
West: These terminations put jobs at risk – not only the research faculty, but also the teams who were working on these projects and the administrators who helped format and submit the grants.
One of my Ph.D. students received an email from NIH that simply said his grant has been terminated. So his source of support as a graduate student at the University of Michigan was gone in an instant.
The University of Michigan has developed a new research funding program where you can apply for support if you've had your grant terminated, and your local department can help share the costs. My student is waiting to hear if he will receive some of that funding. This is a welcome development, but only a short-term solution to this problem.
So right now, everybody's pivoting. Your first thought is, how can I write a proposal that's not going to have certain keywords in it? And that's just not a good way to do science.
The University of Michigan is committed to doing the best possible science, but it's going to require some adaptation in terms of how to think about the proposal process. And, honestly, for the immediate future, part of being a scientist in the U.S. is getting a firm understanding of what the current administration wants to fund.
Are you or your colleagues considering leaving the university?
West: That's the million-dollar question. Do you decide to pack up your family and move to a different country? Do you shift to private industry? Do you wait it out for the next administration and hope that things swing back in a direction that's going to support the kind of work that you're doing? Those are the kinds of career decisions that people have to think about.
Is the U.S. going to lose a lot of top-tier faculty at top-tier universities like the University of Michigan because of what's going on? That's a significant concern.
Read more of our stories about Michigan.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Brady Thomas West, University of Michigan
Read more:
US colleges and universities have billions stashed away in endowments − a higher ed finance expert explains what they are
Endowments aren't blank checks – but universities can rely on them more heavily in turbulent times
Reducing diversity, equity and inclusion to a catchphrase undermines its true purpose
Brady Thomas West has received funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the American Heart Association, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and National Science Foundation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
AP Top Stories July 13
Here's the latest for Sunday, July 13th: Weeklong search for victims of flooding Texas paused due to heavy rains; Iran's FM says nuclear talks wiht U.S. could resume; EU decides to hold off on imposing retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods; Mexico City celebrates 700th anniversary of founding of Aztec empire.

Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
FAA says Boeing fuel switches are safe following fatal Air India crash
The US Federal Aviation Administration has issued a notice to its international counterparts that fuel control switches in Boeing Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Ellen DeGeneres Supports Rosie O'Donnell After Donald Trump Threatened to Revoke Her U.S. Citizenship
Ellen DeGeneres is supporting Rosie O'Donnell after Donald Trump threatened to revoke her U.S. citizenship in a social media post on July 12 The former talk show host shared a carousel post on Instagram on July 13, featuring Trump's social media comments and O'Donnell's response to the president "Good for you," DeGeneres wrote, tagging O'DonnellEllen DeGeneres is putting her support behind Rosie O'Donnell. The former talk show host, 67, gave a shout-out to O'Donnell on Instagram on Sunday, July 13 — just one day after President Donald Trump claimed he was 'giving serious consideration' to revoking O'Donnell's U.S. citizenship. DeGeneres responded to the news with a carousel post containing two slides. One featured a screenshot of Trump's July 12 social media post in which he claimed O'Donnell, 63, was "a threat to humanity," and the other showed O'Donnell's response to the president. "Good for you," DeGeneres wrote, tagging O'Donnell. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Ellen DeGeneres (@ellendegeneres) Alongside an image of Trump, 79, standing next to Jeffrey Epstein — who was charged with multiple offenses relating to the sex trafficking of minors — O'Donnell wrote in an Instagram response to the president that she was "everything" he "fears": a "loud woman," "queer woman," "mother who tells the truth" and an American who "got out of the country b4 u set it ablaze." The post came amid public outcry about Epstein's death — specifically claims that the Trump administration was mishandling the investigation into the case. "You build walls — I build a life for my autistic kid in a country where decency still exists," O'Donnell continued in the message, later reposted by DeGeneres. "You crave loyalty — I teach my children to question power. You sell fear on golf courses — I make art about surviving trauma. You lie, you steal, you degrade — I nurture, I create, I persist. You are everything that is wrong with America — and I'm everything you hate about what's still right with it." "You want to revoke my citizenship? Go ahead and try, King Joffrey with a tangerine spray tan. I'm not yours to silence. I never was," she added. O'Donnell wrote in a separate post that 'the president of the USA has always hated the fact that I see him for who he is — a criminal con man sexual abusing liar out to harm our nation to serve himself.' "This is why I moved to Ireland," she continued. 'He is a dangerous old soulless man with dementia who lacks empathy compassion and basic humanity — I stand in direct opposition [to] all he represents — so do millions of others. U gonna deport all who stand against ur evil tendencies — ur a bad joke who can't form a coherent sentence #nevertrump." Trump initially made his statement about O'Donnell on his Truth Social platform, arguing that "she should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her." O'Donnell, who previously confirmed that she had moved to Ireland on Jan. 15 with her 12-year-old child Clay, has long been critical of Trump and his administration's policies. She said the decision was in the best interests of herself and Clay as she alluded to the current administration's policies on TikTok. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Legally, Trump does not have the power to revoke New York-born O'Donnell's citizenship, per the 14th Amendment, which many prominent legal scholars say protects citizenship for all people born on U.S. soil. As for DeGeneres, she also relocated from the U.S. recently, to the English countryside with wife Portia de Rossi, a source told PEOPLE in November. Citing The Wrap at the time, Vanity Fair reported that DeGeneres told friends her move was motivated by the presidential election. O'Donnell later told Us Weekly she was "shocked" that DeGeneres reportedly had a similar idea to move. 'I've never really known Ellen to say anything political in her life, so I was surprised to read that she left because of President Trump. Like, that shocked me, actually,' O'Donnell said. 'I've been a political person my whole life, not better or worse, it's just a different way to be in the world." Read the original article on People