The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is among 13 research universities and three organizations suing the National Science Foundation (NSF), after the agency’s efforts to slash indirect costs at grant-receiving institutions.
The lawsuit follows a Friday announcement from NSF stating that it would cut the rate of reimbursement to higher education institutions for “indirect costs” or overhead costs for institutions that receive grants to 15%.
The 15% maximum rate applies only to new awards on or after May 5, 2025, according to the announcement.
“Besides its destructive impact on research and training, this latest effort violates longstanding federal laws and regulations that govern grantmaking. We are seeking to prevent implementation of this poorly conceived and short-sighted policy, which will only hurt the American people and weaken the country. We look forward to making our case,” the organizations suing said in a statement.
The Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education, the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities are leading the lawsuit, in addition to the research universities that joined.
On top of the cuts to reimbursement rates, NSF told staff members at the end of April to stop awarding funding until further notice, and NSF has terminated approximately 1,425 grants, according to Nature.
Terminated NSF grants have been abruptly canceled due to President Donald Trump’s orders to end support of research on diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as the study of misinformation, according to the Associated Press.
In Trump’s proposed budget on Friday, he aims to slash NSF’s budget by more than half, from $8.8 billion to $3.9 billion, among other cuts to NSF.
The director of NSF resigned at the end of April, stating that he had “done all I can to advance the critical mission of the agency.”
Read more: MIT, Tufts and Brandeis sue NIH for attempted cut of indirect research funds
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Department of Energy have similarly announced that they would cut “indirect costs” or overhead costs for institutions that receive grants.
However, those were halted by federal judges following lawsuits against it.
MIT was one of those that sued in response to the cut to indirect costs at NIH.
“NSF’s action is unlawful for most of the same reasons, and it is especially arbitrary because NSF has not even attempted to address many of the flaws the district courts found with NIH’s and DOE’s unlawful policies. As with those policies, if NSF’s policy is allowed to stand, it will badly undermine scientific research at America’s universities and erode our Nation’s enviable status as a global leader in scientific research and innovation,” the higher education organizations and institutions said in the lawsuit.
In February, MIT joined Brandeis University and Tufts University, among over a dozen institutions suing the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services after the agency’s efforts to slash indirect costs at grant-receiving institutions.
Indirect costs being cut to 15% would amount to a decrease of $30 to $35 million a year at MIT, according to a letter from MIT President Sally Kornbluth.
That could impact research focused on treatments and cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Lyme disease and autism, she said.
“We believe these proposed cuts are unlawful and pose a direct threat to MIT’s mission — and they fracture the compact between the U.S. government and its research institutions that, since the end of World War II, has fueled America’s innovation economy and ensured the nation’s security, prosperity and quality of life,” Kornbluth wrote.
