The Fight for Funding

“The big takeaway is, I run a lab with full-time employees, and I do that by having federal grants. So I’m worried.”

This is Laura Katz (she/her), PhD. Elsie Damon Simonds Professor of Biological Sciences at Smith. Katz’s research focuses on the evolution and phylogeny of understudied microbial eukaryotes. Her lab is one of the largest on Smith’s campus, totaling over twenty members between post-docs, graduate students, and undergraduate student researchers. 

Katz is also one of 26 Smith College professors who actively fund research with grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF), which now have a risk of termination following funding cuts to the NSF by the Trump Administration on Feb. 7th. 

The NSF awarded approximately $8.9 billion through 10,600 new awards in 2024. However, since Trump was inaugurated in January, the number of new grants handed out by NSF has fallen by nearly 50% compared to the same two-month period a year ago. 

“I just have to be really conservative [with funding],” Katz said. “[This] could be the last grant I ever get.”

NSF is not the only science funding to come under attack–the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) have also received significant cuts, alongside other drastic actions by the administration like the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). 

The US federal government funds a significant proportion of academic research expenses, with a total of 55% of all funding coming from it in 2021. Without any definite information available regarding whether and when grant cuts would take place, grant holders have been thrown into an atmosphere of uncertainty.

“Anybody who's in science is concerned, whether or not you have funds directly from those agencies,” said Steven Williams (he/him), a PhD. Smith Professor of Biological Sciences. Williams runs a laboratory focused on the molecular biology of parasites that cause Neglected tropical diseases. 

Williams has completely lost his USAID funding, and his renewed NIH grant has yet to arrive despite being almost two months past due. In the absence of this NIH grant, Williams can no longer fund the salaries of two full-time Research Technicians or send reagents to countries in Africa battling neglected tropical diseases, both key pieces of his research.

“If you know in several months that a grant runs out and you have to look for a job, that's one thing,” Williams said, “but if you find out at the very last minute, [that is a] much more traumatic, traumatic situation.” While these technicians' salaries have been covered by Smith since then, the future remains uncertain.

The Smith College Office of Grants & Sponsored Research, which assists faculty as they apply for NSF and NIH grants, has worked hand in hand with faculty through the uncertainty. It has held multiple Q&A sessions and created an accessible document containing information regarding NIH and NSF grant freezes. 

Jessica Gersony’s lab, which is partially funded by NSF, received an email with instructions to  “stop all DEI work that was related to the grant.” This is primarily an attack on language. For many years, describing parties impacted by research was a key part of grant applications. By highlighting equal and equitable research in grant proposals, funding is now getting flagged and, in some cases, pulled. 

Jess Pfeffer (they/them), the science careers advisor in the Lazarus Center, maintains a positive outlook. “Science will always happen. It just might look different on the outside,”  Pfeffer said. 

This summer application cycle, many students have had their internships and Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REUs) canceled. After these programs realized they might not receive a funding renewal as a result of the Trump administration’s cuts, they pulled or downsized their programs. 

Images Courtesy of Lily Serry

Despite this, Pfeffer believes that the situation may stabilize after this year. “[I’m] cautiously optimistic that a lot of these [opportunities] are going to come back, maybe slightly differently, but we'll still have the opportunities,” Pfeffer said. 

The future is also unclear for Smith students who have applied for graduate programs. Acceptance letters, typically sent between February and April, were received by Smithies right as research departments felt the effects of cuts. 

Chemistry major Zoe Gould ‘25 (she/they) will be attending graduate school in the fall.  

“Most people I know who applied and got into Chemistry PhD programs at some point this year got a notification saying, from a school that they'd already been accepted to, we might not actually have funding for you,” Gould said.

It comes as a blow for seniors who have devoted their undergraduate studies to research, where many have found themselves in limbo on waitlists or rejected because programs that would have otherwise accepted them had to downsize. The NSF recently stated it would be cutting the number of graduate research fellowships it awards this cycle by half. 

Despite the uncertainty, Gould remains determined. “Even though my country doesn't want me to get a PhD right now, I'm still gonna go get a PhD”.

While the current outlook of scientific research funding is unclear, Katz remains hopeful.

“These are really dark times,” said Katz, “but I remain optimistic that the college is committed to providing a really valuable undergraduate experience in science.”

Written by Beatrice Tauer, Gwynn Canfield and Chelsea Harmon.