‘Disaster for research’: Concern among radiologists over new federal rule regulating grantmaking

Concern is brewing among radiologists and other physicians over a new federal rule regulating grants for scientific research. 

Released by the Office of Management and Budget on May 29, the proposed updates seek 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 suspending or terminating funds based on compliance or policy concerns, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy notes.

Radiologists and others in research are now expressing alarm about this purported politicization of federal grantmaking, worried it could impede future scientific discoveries.

“The … rule changes for federal grants proposed by the Office of Management and Budget will be a disaster for research in the United States,” Jonathan M. Rubin, MD, PhD, a radiologist and professor emeritus with the University of Michigan, said in comments submitted to the OMB on June 3. 

Among other proposed changes, the rule also would increase monitoring and reporting requirements for organizations collaborating on federally funded projects, according to the ASGE. It also would require E-Verify participation for employees supported by federal funding, add new certification and compliance requirements, and restrict consideration of funding related to diversity, equity and inclusion. OMB also wants to increase federal oversight of funding decisions, a move the endoscopy society said “raises concerns regarding academic freedom and scientific independence.” 

“Of particular concern are provisions that could affect medical education, physician workforce development, research collaborations, scientific meetings, educational programs, and public health initiatives that support patient care and innovation,” ASGE said in a blog post June 2. 

The 400-page proposed rule comes following a previous executive order issued in August, Time Magazine notes. In it, President Trump called for greater oversight of grantmaking to ensure “American tax dollars are not wasted or misused.” Such changes also were spelled out in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 governance blueprint. In the order, the president cited worries about federal funding going toward topics such as critical race theory, gender identity and DEI. 

“In short, there is a strong need to strengthen oversight and coordination of, and to streamline, agency grantmaking to address these problems, prevent them from recurring, and ensure greater accountability for use of public funds more broadly,” the order states. “The government holds tax revenue in trust for the American people, and agencies should treat it accordingly.”

But researchers such as Michigan’s Dr. Rubin believe these updates go too far and could hamper advances in medicine. As a scientist at the Ann Arbor-based institution, the radiologist said he relies on federal grants to support research relating to medical imaging and ultrasound. Rubin has published over 250 papers in peer reviewed journals, with 16 patents and findings that have impacted diagnosis and therapy. 

“This proposed action by the OMB will kill my research,” Rubin wrote. “I strongly oppose this action, and this action must be stopped. One cannot imagine a more devastating collection of rules. Nothing could be more detrimental to research in the United States. This action cannot be allowed to go forward.”

In separate comments, Patrick Boyle, PhD, an associate professor of bioengineering at the University of Washington, questioned changes in the rule related to international research collaboration. In his field, progress depends on contributions from physicians, imaging experts, physiologists and data scientists across the globe. Such international collaboration is often “not a luxury or ideological preference” but, rather, a “mechanism by which high-impact scientific advances become possible.” 

“I am especially shocked by the apparent disregard for the enormous public benefit that can come from international scientific collaboration,” Boyle wrote in comments submitted Thursday. “Many of the most important advances in cardiovascular medicine, computational biology, imaging, and artificial intelligence have emerged from cross-border partnerships.”

The Federation of American Scientists issued a detailed breakdown of the proposed rule on June 4. It highlighted comments from others in the scientific industry, calling the changes a “brazen power grab” and “weaponization” of federal grantmaking. OMB’s proposal would impact billions in federal funding, with the federation predicting the rule will likely lead to litigation. 

Meanwhile, the American College of Radiology issued a news update about the rule to its members on Thursday. ACR is exploring a “coordinated response and advocacy strategy” to address the proposal, which it labeled a “a significant update to the foundational guidance governing all federal grants and cooperative agreements.”

OMB is accepting comments on the proposal through July 13 and has already received 5,269 responses as of June 4.