University of Iowa researchers cope with ‘fluid’ federal funding cuts and restraining orders

IOWA CITY — A day after the University of Iowa paused or slowed research-related grant applications, hiring and general spending in response to funding cuts announced by the National Institutes of Health — the campus’ largest federal research funder — UI officials retracted that guidance Tuesday due to a temporary restraining order preventing the cuts at least for now.

The nationwide restraining order — finding the rescission threatens “immediate and irreparable injury” to American medical colleges — gives the NIH until Friday to respond, with a hearing scheduled for Feb. 21.

“Please recognize that this is a very fluid situation, and we request and appreciate your patience,” UI Interim Vice President for Research Lois Geist wrote in a campus announcement Tuesday directed at researchers in limbo over the funding of their work. “We are staying on top of events, consulting with peer institutions, and meeting with our congressional delegation.”

  Buy Photo

Should the NIH eventually be permitted to proceed with a proposed reduction in the amount of indirect costs it covers for the research endeavors it supports, the UI could lose an estimated $33.6 million a year, according to an online calculator using NIH data.

For the state as a whole, the hit could near $37 million.

“We recognize the urgency of the situation and are working to assess potential impacts at the college, department, lab, and investigator level,” Geist wrote. “We are working diligently to understand how best to support our mission-driven research and the talented people across our institution who forge new frontiers of discovery.”

Research has ‘tangible benefits’ for Iowans

The federal funding turmoil began just days into President Donald Trump’s second term when the NIH paused some of its activities. Then the new administration issued an order to freeze spending on federal loans and grants.

Although Trump’s budget office rescinded that order and a federal judge weighed in — temporarily blocking agencies from freezing, pausing, impeding, blocking, canceling or terminating awards or obligations — the UI proceeded with caution.

“In only a few cases, we have received stop work orders and have communicated those orders to impacted investigators,” Geist wrote in a Jan. 31 update. “Compliance with the agency directives is mandatory.”

Separate from that paused funding freeze, the NIH announced a change Friday in how and to what degree it will cover indirect costs associated with the research projects it funds — capping indirect coverage at 15 percent for new and existing grants, down from an average of 27 percent.

Indirect research funding, according to Geist, supports state-of-the-art labs; high-speed data processing; patient safety protocols; national security protection; hazardous waste disposal; support personnel; and maintenance staff for cleaning and supplies.

“Simply put, the federal government provides reimbursement for real costs that are incurred in the process of safely and securely conducting high-impact research,” according to Geist. “This research has tangible benefits for the lives of Iowans.”

In response to the indirect cost cap, UI’s Geist on Monday imposed three directives:

“Researchers and departments should exert extra caution and defer starting new activities until we have more clarity,” Geist wrote.

But lawsuits, including by 22 Democratic-led states and the Association of American Medical Colleges among others, challenged the funding reduction and compelled a judge to pause the cuts — and UI’s Geist to respond in turn.

“Given this new information, the actions that we outlined for campus yesterday, Feb. 10, related to pausing NIH submissions are not required at this time,” she wrote.

‘Thousands of NIH grants’

Iowa was not among the states that joined the lawsuit opposing changes to indirect funding from the NIH — which in the 2023 budget year spent more than $35 billion on nearly 50,000 competitive grants to more than 300,000 researchers, according to the lawsuit. NIH grants have led to “innumerable scientific breakthroughs, ranging from the Human Genome Project to the development of the MRI to the discovery of treatments for cancers of all types.”

NIH-backed scientists have won Nobel Prizes — with much of the funded research taking place inside state universities and colleges, private institutions and other research spaces.

“At any given time, individual research universities may depend on thousands of NIH grants that support independent research projects across multiple university facilities,” according to the lawsuit.

A search on the NIH website of clinical research trials located in or connected to Iowa City — home to UI Health Care and the UI College of Medicine — yielded nearly 4,000 results, from research into the effect of a high-salt diet after preeclampsia, a complication of pregnancy, to treatment options for breast cancer or weight management for teenagers.

UIHC lists more than 1,000 clinical research and trial studies on its website — many of which involved NIH funding. The university in the 2024 budget year received $177.3 million in NIH research funding — accounting for more than half of its $313.1 million in research funding from federal sources.

“Brenna Bird is blocking research that could save the lives of cancer patients in Iowa and better treat people who are suffering from diseases like dementia,” Iowa Democratic Party spokesperson Paige Godden said in a statement of Republican Iowa Attorney General Bird’s decision not to join the lawsuits over the NIH funding change.

“Public servants are elected to represent the people who voted for them, not the billionaires who have taken over Washington, D.C. Brenna Bird should do what’s right and stand up to Donald Trump’s measures that prevent medical research from being performed in Iowa,” the statement said.

Vanessa Miller covers higher education for The Gazette.

Comments: (319) 339-3158; vanessa.miller@thegazette.com