American College of Radiology pans proposal to shake up federal grantmaking

The American College of Radiology is adding its voice to a chorus of organizations and individuals concerned about sweeping changes to federal grantmaking processes. 

Released by the administration in May, the proposal seeks to substantially revise regulations governing grants, cooperative agreements and other federal assistance. Changes include expanding government authority to impose special conditions on awards, along with terminating funding based on policy concerns. 

ACR is a staunch advocate for federal funding to support research that produces innovation in patient care, the college said in comments submitted Monday. However, ACR said it is worried these updates could severely impact research in radiology and radiation oncology. 

“If finalized, many of these proposals would fundamentally disrupt the government processes by which grants and cooperative agreements are reviewed, awarded, managed and terminated,” CEO Dana H. Smetherman, MD, MBA, MPH, wrote to the Office of Management and Budget on July 13. “Moreover, undue compliance burdens and destabilizing insecurities would be imposed on researchers, increasing uncertainty and financial risk for innovators,” she added later. 

The rule also would increase monitoring and reporting requirements for organizations collaborating on federally funded projects. It additionally would require E-Verify participation for employees supported by federal funding, add new compliance requirements, and restrict funding for diversity, equity and inclusion. OMB also wants to increase oversight of funding decisions, a move one medical society said, “raises concerns regarding academic freedom and scientific independence.” 

Smetherman noted that the U.S. currently attracts some of the best and brightest scientists from across the world. As part of earning these grants, they are already obligated to perform objective research that is independent of political influence. ACR worries America may lose its standing in the international research community if too many restrictions are placed on grantmaking. 

“If their ability to freely perform research is restricted as proposed, many scientists will either relocate their teams and infrastructure to other countries or terminate their work entirely,” Smetherman added. “The loss of current U.S. scientific expertise, infrastructure and international competitive advantage would take decades to reestablish. As such, finalization [of the proposal] could result in a chilling effect on academic research and innovation in the United States.” 

ACR also expressed concern that oversight of research could shift from experts at federal agencies to political appointees with changing priorities over time. It also worries that these updates would weaken peer review processes meant to ensure fair and rigorous evaluation. Radiologists and other physicians have echoed these concerns in feedback submitted before the comment period ended July 13. OMB received over 54,000 responses since the proposed rule was posted in late May. 

The college highlighted its comments in a news update to its members, posted on Thursday.