A recent federal directive to limit research overhead reimbursements could have expensive consequences for Rhode Island, the state’s congressional delegation said in a letter Tuesday to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
“This cut to research infrastructure would have far-reaching consequences for institutions and researchers in Rhode Island and across the nation, reducing their capacity to conduct cutting-edge research,” U.S. Sens. Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse and U.S. Reps. Seth Magaziner and Gabe Amo wrote in a letter released Tuesday and also sent to Dr. Matthew Memoli, acting director of the NIH.
The NIH indirect funding cap was announced on Feb. 7 in a memo. The new rules would limit NIH grantees to 15% federal reimbursement for indirect costs, which comprise overhead expenses like administration, facilities and any other expenditures not directly linked to the project itself. Private foundations and philanthropic outfits often cap indirect reimbursements to around 15%, the NIH memo argued, while the federal government can pay upwards of 50% in its indirect rates, which are directly negotiated with the grantees.
The rule’s implementation was quickly blocked via a temporary restraining order issued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Feb. 10. On Feb. 21, District Judge Angel Kelley extended the temporary restraining order. But Rhode Island’s congressional delegates are still concerned about the potential for the new rule’s effects on research funding.
“We are encouraged that a federal judge has issued a temporary order halting the administration’s controversial decision,” the delegates wrote. “However, the uncertainty and disruption caused by these irrational decisions highlight the need for the NIH to immediately rescind the guidance on indirect costs and refrain from taking unilateral action on payment for indirect costs in the future.”
The delegates wrote that the new NIH guidance would result in a $4.8 million annual loss for the University of Rhode Island, and over $25 million a year for Brown University. Both schools were recently rated as high-research activity campuses in a national ranking. The letter also cited that NIH funding supported more than 2,213 jobs in Rhode Island in 2023.
“The economic pain caused by slashing NIH research funding will not be contained to one state or one university campus,” the letter reads.
The letter outlined five questions for the NIH and asked the agency to respond by March 7. Among the queries were how Rhode Island’s research institutions can maintain their research hubs without the higher reimbursement rates, whether downstream economic effects had been considered, whether the cuts would affect the state’s ability to hold onto its research workforce and whether the indirect reimbursement cap could hurt “underrepresented or emerging research areas at institutions,” according to the letter.
The delegates were also curious how NIH grantees would continue to access their funds in light of the court’s restraining order: “Following the federal judge’s decision to block the funding cuts, can you confirm that the institutions and biomedical sector dependent on this critical NIH funding will not face any delays with reimbursements?” the letter reads.
This story was originally published by the Rhode Island Current.
