Recent discussions among scientists reveal that applications for a key National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant aimed at supporting Ph.D. students from underrepresented backgrounds are being unexpectedly dismissed during review sessions. This shift raises concerns about the future of many aspiring researchers in science.
This change aligns with new executive orders from the Trump administration that prohibit federal support for programs focused on diversity, equity, inclusion, or accessibility. These orders, issued shortly after Trump took office, claim that efforts promoting these values are illegal.
On January 24, the NIH website indicated that the application period for F-31 diversity grants had closed. Shortly thereafter, during meetings to assess various grant proposals, reviewers were instructed not to consider the diversity applications this funding cycle.
Brian Nosek, director of the Center for Open Science, expressed his concerns, stating, “This is a troubling time for science. We don’t know how these federal directives on diversity will impact resources and the diversity of the scientific community. It feels like a direct attack on those whom these initiatives were designed to support.”
While applicants for the diversity program may qualify for other training grants open to all researchers, they will have to wait at least four months for consideration. This delay could hinder their progress in their research careers.
The F-31 diversity grants not only assist doctoral students but also support a range of initiatives for technicians, postdoctoral researchers, young faculty, and high school student mentoring. Information on these additional programs has also been removed from NIH websites.
These grants, which can cover tuition, fees, health insurance, and living expenses—totaling around $40,000 to $50,000 annually—were intended to help diversify the biomedical workforce. They had been accessible to students from various backgrounds, including those with disabilities and those from economically disadvantaged areas.
One researcher reported being instructed not to review certain grants solely because they were F-31 applications. In a concerning trend, other grant applications with “diversity” in their titles are being similarly set aside. This raises questions about fairness in funding opportunities.
Many scientists feel that these actions make it even harder for underrepresented groups to succeed in academia. Donna Ginther, an economist studying race and gender dynamics in science, stated, “There is significant disappointment across the country about these developments.”
As federal funding becomes uncertain, some researchers are calling for academic institutions to take the lead in supporting diversity and equity in science. Melissa Simon, a professor at Northwestern Medicine, emphasized the need for universities to recognize the precarious state of federal funding related to diversity and health equity.
The NIH diversity program has been around since 1989, aimed at increasing representation in biomedical research. Despite a recent uptick in awarded diversity supplements, disparities still persist, particularly affecting Black researchers, who are underrepresented in funding and senior positions within the NIH.
The implications of these removals can be severe. Failing to support diverse researchers means missing out on valuable perspectives and discoveries essential for advancing science. Rachel Hardeman, from the University of Minnesota, highlighted how critical these grants are for the careers of young scientists, often determining job security and success in academia.
In light of these challenges, some are organizing efforts to address the changes and advocate for diversity in science funding. They caution that this situation sends a discouraging message to students from diverse backgrounds about their place in scientific fields.
While the removal of diversity grants is troubling, experts remind aspiring scientists that there are multiple pathways to success. With determination and continued advocacy for inclusion, the goal of a more diverse scientific community remains within reach.
Source link
diversity and inclusion,Donald Trump,NIH,scientists
