PROVIDENCE, RI – Earlier this week, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump Administration’s attempt to make abrupt, unlawful cuts to research funding at universities, medical schools, hospitals and other scientific institutions administered by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).  A court hearing on the matter is scheduled for February 21st. 

Along with the uncertainty that comes with any major litigation process, so does widespread alarm about what a potential loss of federal grant dollars would mean for the organizations and communities that rely on NIH funding, including those in Rhode Island.  If Trump’s funding cuts take effect, the University of Rhode Island, Brown University, Care New England, and Brown University Health stand to lose as much as $34.3 million, according to the Boston Globe, as innovative health research would be halted, clinical trials put on hold, and an entire generation of medical researchers could lose their career opportunities overnight.

NIH is the primary source of federal funding for medical research in the United States and has partnered with academic and medical researchers nationwide to conduct groundbreaking research that has led to scientific discoveries and advancements that have saved and transformed lives. 

But now the Trump Administration is attempting to suddenly slash billions of dollars of federal funding annually for U.S. research institutions, including local universities, hospitals, and medical centers.  The move could hamper progress toward prevention and treatment of illnesses like Alzheimer’s, cancer, and Parkinson’s disease, and ultimately lead hospitals and universities to lay off staff and shut down laboratories.

Today, U.S. Senator Jack Reed held a press conference at Butler Hospital to oppose these short-sighted cuts that could endanger life-saving research, good-paying jobs, and economic growth in Rhode Island and nationwide.

“NIH is a key driver of America’s strategic advantage in science and technology, and every American who has ever set foot in a hospital has directly benefitted from NIH-supported research.   President Trump’s proposed cuts would halt research, delay promising medical advancements, and eliminate jobs at universities and hospitals,” said Senator Reed.  “NIH has a proven track record of funding scientific breakthroughs and life-saving treatments.  I am heartened that my colleague, Congressman Amo, is taking a lead role in the House to fight these cuts because Congress must work on a bipartisan basis to uphold the law and the law is clear and prohibits modifications to NIH’s indirect costs.  Instead of wasting taxpayers money on costly litigation, I urge the Trump Administration to uphold its contractual obligations that are already in place, drop its attempt to ignore Congress’ funding directives, and stop impeding scientific research and advancement.”

Twenty-two states, including Rhode Island, sued the Trump Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, and NIH for unlawfully cutting these funds.  This week, federal judges ordered the Trump Administration to hold off on making $4 billion in NIH cuts.

The indirect costs that are being targeted by these funding cuts include things like utilities, support staff, cleaning costs, and financial management, as well as employing students, supplying equipment, and more. Universities and hospitals may also use this funding to ensure research facilities are compliant with federal rules and regulations, such as data security and privacy.  The amount the federal government covers is not arbitrary or unknown, rather it is based on a preestablished rate applied to select expenses. The indirect funds are provided to universities and other research institutions in addition to the research award as part of the overall federal-private partnership.

Studies show that every dollar in NIH funding spurs almost $2.50 in economic activity.  NIH funding supports hundreds of thousands of jobs across the country and generates an estimated $92.89 billion in economic activity.

“Rhode Island has a thriving life sciences ecosystem, with a history of innovation in research and discovery fields like neuroscience, health and aging, immunology, RNA and cancer therapy. Scientific breakthroughs can only happen with the right infrastructure – top-notch researchers, supportive institutions and critical financial support,” said Dr. Mark A. Turco, President & CEO of the Rhode Island Life Science Hub. “Reducing indirect support has the potential to slow the advancement of groundbreaking scientific advances. The Rhode Island Life Science Hub remains committed to supporting the state’s institutions, partners and the wider scientific community to continue to advance innovation that drives economic growth and, most importantly, improves the well-being of people and patients.”

“We are extremely grateful for Senator Reed’s leadership on this critical issue. The NIH cuts being proposed directly threaten Care New England and every hospitals' ability to provide innovative research and ultimately advanced medical care. This change would jeopardize the health of the people of Rhode Island. In addition, we are deeply concerned about its negative impact on jobs and the economy.  For the sake of patients, healthcare staff, and our state’s economic well-being, we must all speak out as Senator Reed has,” said Michael Wagner, MD, President and CEO, Care New England Health System.

“Care New England stands united with our healthcare and academic partners in opposing the recent National Institutes of Health (NIH) policy change that would drastically reduce funding for indirect costs of research. This reduction is not just an abstract financial figure—it directly threatens the critical infrastructure that allows us to provide world-class care and conduct the innovative research that benefits our patients, our community, and the state of Rhode Island. This change will have a profound impact on Care New England's research operations, as well as the broader healthcare ecosystem, and we are deeply concerned about its long-term consequences on jobs and the economy. We appreciate Senator Reed’s leadership in addressing this issue and urge swift action to reverse this policy for the sake of our patients, our staff, and our state’s economic well-being,” said William Grobman, MD, Chief Scientific Officer, Care New England.

“Discoveries at America's research universities, like the University of Rhode Island, are changing lives and saving lives,” said Kerry L. LaPlante, PharmD, dean of the University of Rhode Island College of Pharmacy. “Researchers at URI are leading critical work around infectious diseases and neuroscience—like our groundbreaking research on microplastics and their impact on Alzheimer’s and dementia—as well as oncology, where we are identifying tumor development at its earliest stage. These discoveries are not possible without robust and sustained federal funding for the entire research ecosystem. Indirect costs are a critical piece of funding, and they are fundamental to advancing medical research and discovery and to the health and safety of researchers. Without these critical resources, the integrity, safety, and progress of scientific breakthroughs would be at risk. To stay competitive, Rhode Island must continue advocating for strong research funding—funding that fuels innovation, supports jobs, and sustains the research ecosystem and scientific discovery—and we are grateful to Senator Reed and our entire Rhode Island delegation for their leadership.”

“At Brown University, in addition to halting critical research on a host of health challenges, from child mental health to Alzheimer's disease to cancer, we estimate we'd have to cut roughly 200 jobs if the indirect cost rate is capped at 15 percent,” said Mukesh Jain, senior vice president for health affairs and dean of medicine and biological sciences at Brown University. “It's also likely that we'd have to pause construction of the Danoff Labs in Providence’s Jewelry District, which will house research in aging, immunity, brain science, cancer and biomedical engineering, among other fields. These cuts have downstream effects on union construction jobs, building material purchases, and laboratory equipment. The ripple effects are felt through the local economy. We are thankful for Sen. Reed's leadership on this issue.”

During Trump’s first term in office, his Administration proposed deep NIH cuts but was rebuffed by Congress.  In the federal lawsuit filed this week, the plaintiffs contend that the past actions by Congress established funding practices that cannot be changed without Congressional approval.