OMB Proposes 400-Page Grant Rewrite to Steer $1.2 Trillion Toward Trump Priorities
Updated
Updated · The Conversation · Jun 15
OMB Proposes 400-Page Grant Rewrite to Steer $1.2 Trillion Toward Trump Priorities
3 articles · Updated · The Conversation · Jun 15
Summary
A May 29 proposal from the Office of Management and Budget would rewrite federal grant rules so discretionary awards must “demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities,” giving political appointees more control over funding decisions.
The change would formalize a shift signaled by Trump’s August 2025 executive order, moving grantmaking away from expert review and program criteria toward White House priorities across research, education, public safety and other programs.
$44 billion in annual NIH and NSF science funding could be especially affected, with universities, nonprofits and scientific groups warning that peer review would weaken and grant decisions would become less predictable and more political.
The draft also would expand agencies’ ability to terminate existing grants that no longer fit administration priorities, raising risks for nonprofits and universities that make multiyear staffing, lease and research commitments.
July 13 is the deadline for public comments, and OMB aims for the rule to take effect Oct. 1; legal challenges and possible congressional action could still block or reshape it.
With peer review now advisory, what new standards will guide billions in federal research funding?
How might new federal grant rules reshape local community programs for education and public safety?
How will the power to terminate grants affect multi-year projects in science and community service?
Federal Grantmaking Overhaul: $1.2 Trillion in Annual Funding Faces Political Oversight and Ideological Bans
Overview
The Office of Management and Budget has proposed a major overhaul of federal grant regulations, following an executive order from 2025. This 400-page proposal, published in May 2026, would shift the authority to approve grants from career civil servants to political appointees, affecting over $1.2 trillion in annual funding across most executive agencies. The changes would impact a wide range of organizations, including universities, healthcare providers, and researchers. By prioritizing political alignment over traditional peer review, the proposal could reshape how federal grants are awarded and managed, raising concerns about the future of research, education, and public services.