Federal Research Funding Proposal Enters Next Phase

Nearly 500,000 public comments have been submitted as Congress considers legislation that would temporarily delay implementation of the OMB grant funding rule. 

Earlier this summer, the AIUM encouraged members and the broader scientific and medical community to participate in the public comment process regarding the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) proposed rule governing federal grant funding. Nearly 500,000 public comments were submitted by researchers, clinicians, educators, scientific organizations, patient advocates, and other stakeholders who shared concerns about the proposal’s potential impact on research, innovation, and scientific collaboration. 

Those comments helped elevate awareness of a proposal that could significantly alter the way federally funded research is reviewed, awarded, conducted, and communicated in the United States. Many commenters expressed concerns that the proposed changes could weaken the role of scientific peer review, increase uncertainty in funding decisions, create new administrative burdens, and disrupt ongoing research efforts. 

Now, the process has moved to the next stage. 

The U.S. Senate has passed the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2027, a continuing resolution (CR) that would provide temporary government funding through December 11. This legislation includes language that would temporarily prevent implementation of the OMB’s proposed grant funding rule, which could otherwise take effect as early as October 1 if finalized. 

The House of Representatives must still approve the measure before the September 30 fiscal year deadline. Members of Congress are currently in their home districts during the August recess, providing a valuable opportunity for constituents to make their voices heard. 

Why This Matters 

A temporary pause on implementation would provide additional time for Congress, federal agencies, and stakeholders to fully assess the potential consequences of the proposed rule. It would also create an opportunity for further discussion, revision, or possible withdrawal of provisions that could negatively affect the nation’s research enterprise. 

For the medical and scientific communities, maintaining a strong, merit-based research funding system is critical to advancing discovery, improving patient care, supporting innovation, and preserving U.S. leadership in science and technology. 

Take the Next Step 

The public comment period demonstrated the depth and breadth of concern surrounding this proposal. Now, advocacy efforts are shifting from public comments to congressional outreach. 

AIUM members and others who are concerned about the future of federally funded research are encouraged to contact their U.S. Representative and communicate the importance of maintaining a strong, transparent, merit-based federal research funding system. Personal messages from constituents can help lawmakers understand how implementation of the OMB rule changes could adversely affect research, education, scientific collaboration, and patient care in their districts. 

Not sure who represents you in Congress? You can identify your U.S. Representative using the House of Representatives’ “Find Your Representative” tool. Once you’ve located your Representative, visit their official website to submit a message through their online contact form or send an email to their office. You may also contact the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected directly to your Representative’s office. Personal outreach from constituents can help lawmakers better understand how proposed changes to federal research funding could affect research institutions, healthcare providers, educators, scientists, and patients in their communities. 

As this proposal continues to develop, the AIUM remains committed to advocating for policies that support innovation, transparency, and patient safety. The AIUM will provide timely updates and insights, helping you stay informed and prepared for any changes that may impact your work and the broader research landscape. 

As a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, the AIUM does not endorse political parties or candidates. The AIUM believes it is important to keep members informed about policy developments that may significantly affect the ultrasound and broader medical research communities. 

The AIUM, the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM), Laurel, MD.

Logo of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) featuring the text 'aium' in blue.

Proposed Federal Grant Changes Could Impact Research, Conferences, & Publications

Public Comment Period Open Through July 13 

Over the last few weeks, a growing conversation has been taking shape around a major policy proposal from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This proposed rule could fundamentally reshape how federally funded research is awarded, conducted, and shared across the United States, and could affect everything from grant processes to public access to scientific findings. 

As an organization dedicated to advancing ultrasound through research, education, and best practices, with patient safety at the center, the AIUM is monitoring this proposal and engaging with peer organizations during the public comment period. This is a set amount of time during which the public can review and provide feedback on a proposed government rule, regulation, or policy before it is finalized. This policy proposal comment period is open through July 13 at 11:59 pm ET

Individuals may choose to submit a comment and share their perspective about the proposal. Tens-of-thousands of comments have already been submitted from across the research, education, health care, and nonprofit communities. Input from clinicians, researchers, educators, and medical professionals can help provide real-world context on how proposed changes may affect patient care, research, education, and scientific collaboration.  

As a nonpartisan, nonprofit association, the AIUM does not take political positions. At the same time, this proposal has significant implications for the medical and scientific community, including AIUM members. AIUM’s Executive Committee of the Board believes it is important that members are aware of the opportunity to engage in the public comment process. 

What Are the Proposed Changes?  

For a summary of key changes in the proposal, read more here. Here are a few of the main takeaways: 

  • Increased political oversight of grants: Political appointees would review and approve all discretionary awards, and funding decisions must align with administration priorities, potentially overriding scientific merit. 
  • Peer review no longer central: Expert peer review becomes advisory only, weakening a long-standing foundation of U.S. research funding. 
  • New, unclear standards: Grants must meet an undefined “Gold Standard Science” requirement, creating uncertainty and broad discretion in approvals. 
  • Risk to ongoing research: Active grants could be terminated mid-project without cause if priorities change. 
  • Restrictions on research topics: Institutions could face risk even for separately funded activities. 
  • Limits on international collaboration: New restrictions make global research partnerships more difficult and require additional approvals. 
  • Expanded eligibility scrutiny: Applicants may be denied based on affiliations or perceived viewpoints. 
  • Increased administrative burden: New compliance requirements, including mandatory E-Verify for grant personnel. 

What are the Direct Impacts on AIUM Members?  

While this proposal will impact the medical space writ-large, here are ways that this will directly impact the AIUM, the organization’s members, and the AIUM’s nonprofit services. 

  • Research & Funding: Greater uncertainty in funding decisions and project continuity and shift from merit-based evaluation to policy-driven considerations. 
  • Conferences & Education: Conference attendance would require advance agency approval written into grants and reduced flexibility to present findings, collaborate, and stay current. 
  • Journals & Publishing: Publication costs (including open access fees) would be generally unallowable and journal subscriptions may not be covered by grant funds, which would create potential barriers to sharing and advancing ultrasound research. 
  • Professional Engagement: Society memberships require prior approval and justification, and there may be potential limits on participation in organizations like the AIUM.  
  • Scientific Communication: New restrictions on public communication and outreach, and “issue advocacy” rules may limit how findings are shared. 

Why Do These Proposed Changes Matter? 

These proposed changes represent a significant shift in how scientific research is funded and managed in the U.S., moving away from independent, peer-reviewed processes toward increased centralized oversight. For the ultrasound community, this could directly affect innovation and research progress, educational opportunities and collaboration, publication and dissemination of new knowledge and ultimately, quality of care and patient safety. 

How Can I Take Action and Make a Public Comment? 

The public comment period is open through July 13. AIUM members, and everyone interested in this topic, have an opportunity to help shape the outcome. Below are some tips on how to create an effective public comment.  

  • Begin with your background and expertise. Briefly describe your experience with federal grants, including the types of grants you’ve worked with or administered. 
  • Reference specific section numbers. For each point you make, include the relevant section of the proposed rule (e.g., [200.205]). You do not need to comment on every part of the rule.  
  • Provide concrete details and impacts. Go beyond simply stating support or opposition. Share specific facts, data, or examples that explain how the proposed changes would affect you, your work, or your broader community.  
  • Highlight your unique perspective. Individual, well-supported comments are more impactful than generic or template responses. Emphasize your personal experience and insights to help decision-makers understand the real-world implications. 
  • Maintain a professional and respectful tone. Keep your comments clear, constructive, and fact-based. Professional communication helps ensure your feedback is taken seriously and effectively considered. 

For this proposal, the public comment period is open through July 13 at 11:59 pm ET. You may submit a comment here. 

The AIUM’s Commitment 

As this proposal continues to develop, the AIUM remains committed to engaging with peer organizations and advocating for policies that support innovation, transparency, and patient safety. The AIUM will provide timely updates and insights, helping you stay informed and prepared for any changes that may impact your work and the broader research landscape. 

The AIUM Executive Committee, the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM), Laurel, MD.

Logo of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM), featuring blue text and a circular symbol.