The Best Time to Submit a Grant

As you probably know, the grant world is now in a great upheaval. The new government is promising to be much more involved in the running of federal funding agencies, and its influence is certainly being felt.

The biggest earthquake to directly influence grant applicants so far was the announcement of cutting the indirect cost rates of all grants and federal agencies to 15%. This is currently being litigated, so it is not clear if it will pass or not. At a minimum, I expect there to be some significant cut, although it may not be to the extent that the government announced earlier this month. If it passes, this will be a heavy blow to the research community, primarily academia, but secondarily to most researchers who rely on grants, with the extent of the impact proportional to the extent of the cut in the indirect cost rate (stay tuned for another blog on how I predict this may affect the research community). Already this is creating shockwaves, with many institutions bracing for impact, entering into a holding pattern, or implementing unprecedented measures to cope with this drastic change.

In parallel, the funding agencies themselves are being shaken by mass firings and layoffs, in accordance with the government’s agenda to make its agencies more efficient. This purge has been implemented from the lowest ranking workers up to the very highest echelons. Thus, NSF has lost approximately 10% of its workforce, some 750 more were fired from CDC, while NIH terminated over 1,000. These include both probationary workers and PhD level experts. Some noteworthy key officers to have been lost include NIH’s Deputy Director for Extramural Research Michael Lauer, MD, NIH’s Principal Deputy Director Larry Tabak, PhD, and Director of ARPA-H, Dr. Renee Wegrzyn.

The review process of applications that have already been submitted has also been impacted. The registry for council meetings that were supposed to be scheduled for the end of January and February has been shut down, such that council meetings that had not already been scheduled prior to the new administration taking office have been suspended, meaning that any grants that were supposed to have been approved for funding during that time are on hold, with no indication of when those meeting will resume: whether they will be rescheduled in the coming weeks, or postponed to the next council meetings in May. Thus far, this is estimated to have resulted in a freeze of approximately $1.5 billion in grants that were supposed to have been awarded.

Other than these processes that have already begun, there are also the impending prospects of government interference with specific programs and grants, in particular those that promote political ideology. Stay tuned to further blogs on the matter, but for now I’ll just state that at greatest risk of prohibition by the government are programs intended to support diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, as well as gender identity.

Add to that the communication freeze that has been imposed on the NIH, which adds to the uncertainty and impedes us from fully understanding what is happening there. While the freeze has not been complete, and occasionally someone can be found at NIH who will respond to emails, it is clear that even they do not fully understand what is happening and provide reliable projections for what is in store.

All these upheavals are creating unprecedented uncertainty, with an atmosphere that is at least bordering on, if not already in panic. Some universities are bracing for impact by already altering their hirings and even admissions. While there have been institutions that have been footing the bill for their researchers whose grants were delayed by the halt in the council review meetings, this can only be a temporary solution – it would not be viable in the long term.

So with all this chaos, would it even be advisable to submit grant applications at all at this time?

Yes. Absolutely!

For one thing, if the indirect costs are indeed cut to 15%, that would mean more money available for research – an estimated $4 billion dollars more – and more grants. Also, with many programs that are objectionable to the government being cut, this also means more money available for those programs that do make the cut. After all, the NIH funding budget for 2025 remains the same and they are required to use it up by the end of the year. So, these two government restrictions could end up translating into higher success rates.

But wouldn’t this hold true regardless of when you submit? That still doesn’t say why now.

True. But, one should also consider the competitive environment. The uncertainty described above is understandably deterring many potential applicants from applying at this time. They prefer to wait until the dust settles and see where the chips fall. And that is precisely the reason why now is the best time to submit: this is the time in which there is least competition.

Consider the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow. As the Cold War was still officially on, as well as in protest against the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan, the US boycotted this event. Canada, Japan, West Germany, China and South Korea also joined the boycott, with the United Kingdom, France and Australia supporting the boycott, but leaving it up to their own National Olympic Committees and individual athletes to decide whether to participate or not, eventually sending much smaller delegations. In all, 67 countries did not participate in those Olympic games.

Without the participation of so many leading players, the level of the games was obviously diminished, leading to quite an unimpressive sporting event. But for those countries who were not as strong competitors compared to the athletic powerhouses that boycotted the event – they could now compete much more easily. That was their moment to shine without being overshadowed by the usual giants.

Likewise, with many researchers sitting this round out – including some academic institutions that need to be assured that they get a sufficient share of their indirect costs, which are the key competitors for R01 and R21 grants – this could be the best moment to apply, with less competition.

Conversely, consider that those who refrain from applying are mostly biding their time until the storm passes or at least stabilizes. Once the sailing is smooth again, then everyone who didn’t submit in April or in June will be submitting in September or October…in addition to those who will be applying in September and October anyway. So best to take advantage of this lull in competition before it spikes.

Finally, the delays that are currently being experienced will likely take a while to resolve. Especially if the January councils will not be rescheduled, but rather the grants that are in the works now will just be postponed to May, then that will create a huge backlog. Even if the review process gets back on track by the summer or fall, it will take them a while to process all the applications from multiple submission cycles that have been delayed. Thus, by postponing, you are not only delaying by one review cycle, but it would likely turn out to be more because of the backlog. Once the review process is back on, you want to be at the front of the line, rather than just submitting then, with at least two cycles worth of applicants ahead of you.

Times of crisis and uncertainty are daunting. But there can also be great opportunity in them for those who know how to take advantage of them.