Proposed Changes To Federal Research Grants (OMB) & Oversight

[Therapist4Chnge]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Saw this on the division 22 list serv. Since it can impact psychology in a serious way, I thought it important to share.

———
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed sweeping revisions to the Uniform Guidance governing all federal grants (2 CFR Part 200), with a comment period closing July 13, 2026 and an effective date of October 1, 2026.

While individual provisions may appear to be administrative updates, their combined effect is alarming. Taken together, the proposed rule would:

• Replace peer review with political appointee discretion, explicitly requiring that awards "demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities"
• Allow grants to be terminated at any point if an agency determines the work no longer serves the "national interest as it exists at the time of termination” or due to the researcher’s organization affiliation or personal political actions.
• Create a private enforcement mechanism allowing outside individuals or organizations to bring legal action against grant recipients for perceived ideological noncompliance, with potential federal cooperation
• Prohibit research engaging with health disparities, gender identity, reproductive health, and disparate impact analysis, areas central to rehabilitation psychology and the populations we serve

Because this rule has gone through proper notice-and-comment rulemaking, the most viable pathway to blocking or modifying it may be litigation. That litigation will be built on the administrative record generated during this comment period. Specific, concrete comments documenting harm to real research programs and clinical care are not just feedback. They are evidence.

Steps that can be taken before July 13:

1. Visit the APA Response Center (updates.apaservices.org) for resources on the proposed federal grants rule and to share your story via their member impact survey. Narratives from rehabilitation psychologists are exactly what is needed to support APA's advocacy efforts
2. Connect with your institution's research office to contribute to an institutional comment, or submit directly at regulations.gov (search "OMB Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Part 200")

 

[PsyDr]

What could possibly go wrong with this approach?

 

[Doctor Eliza]

This is horrifying. I heard about it last week from someone who is in medical research. I can't believe that this isn't getting more attention.

 

[PsyDr]

the Psydr institute is about to launch a research program called “Why do weaklings and dames all have trunk derangement syndrome?”.

(We will promptly offer grants to legitimate organizations and go bankrupt soon thereafter)

 

[R. Matey]

On brand with what I expect from the Trump administration. Hilarious that this is coming from the group of people who criticized liberals of academic orthodoxy.

 

[Sanman]

Russell Vought at it again.