An Ultimatum in Science Research Funding

During my years as a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), I never stopped to think about our funding. Usually, that is the responsibility of our trustee leader, the Principal Investigator. For many research institutions, UCSF being no exception, grant funding is critical. 

UCSF reports that one-fifth of its revenue comes from grants and contracts. In 2024, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded UCSF $814,929,934.

“NIH funding is really the backbone of groundbreaking research. It’s what lets scientists take on big, life-changing questions,” said a UCSF finance analyst who asked that their name be withheld. “It’s about providing researchers with the runway to address complex problems that no one else is positioned to solve.”

In a very competitive process, Principal Investigators submit a research proposal to the NIH and, if successful, are granted an award. Before hands-on research can begin, finance analysts help researchers plan their budget, oversee spending and report compliance. 

On April 21, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued a notice with new terms and conditions for accepting grant funding. Specifically, recipients of NIH grants cannot operate or promote any diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs; otherwise, their grant will be terminated and funds will be recovered. 

The NIH’s announcement gives researchers an ultimatum: continue research or continue DEI programs. The two cannot coexist.

DEI programs exist in academia to offset systemic disadvantages, according to a researcher at UCSF.

“Often, researchers from low socioeconomic background or Native, Latin, or Black descent don’t pursue science because there are numerous barriers for them. Pursuing a higher degree is a sign of wealth and privilege,” she said.

“DEI initiatives ensure that qualified, talented and hardworking trainees from these backgrounds have an opportunity to pursue their passion for science. Having individuals from diverse backgrounds in the lab allows for more collaborative, rigorous and innovative science.”

If students wanted to learn about science, their curiosity would cost them. The price of a bachelor’s degree is an early hurdle for young scientists. 

While studying biology in college, I had to pay an extra $50 for each class with a lab section. Yet, I was required to take multiple year-long courses and electives, each with their unique lab, to complete my degree. A lab manual was another $25. Online problem sets were $70. I paid one-time fees for goggles, a lab coat and a special lab notebook. 

DEI programs try to remediate this by providing financial support or mentorship.

“For individual scientists, equity and inclusion offer security in bringing one’s whole self to work, affording the mental space to contribute meaningfully to the larger picture of science,” another UCSF researcher said. 

“My undergraduate research was overshadowed by the tension of bottling a part of my identity for fear of its implications on my future. It was not until I entered lab environments that not only openly celebrate diversity but cultivate it in their membership that I realized how the feeling of safety and personal acceptance at work allowed me to think creatively and progress exponentially as an experimental researcher.”

DEI programs seek to not only encourage more diverse representation, but also make underrepresented individuals feel supported.

As someone with a physical disability, I never had the option to hide this aspect of myself. When I was born, my right arm suffered nerve damage that left it mostly paralyzed and its growth stunted. I joined UCSF after graduating from college and was worried about how my disability would limit me as a researcher. 

During one of my first days, my coworker taught me how to store and freeze cells from a blood sample. There was a step that dauntingly seemed as though it required two hands. My coworker was unruffled and offered me various racks and boxes as we engineered a solution to the problem. 

The feeling of being seen and accepted is unmatched. Only when my coworkers repeatedly trust me to navigate the lab as a disabled researcher do I feel like a true scientist.

Even the most empathetic person cannot understand the hardships that people of every race, gender, age, sexual orientation, or physical ability face. That is where DEI programs come in. These programs remind us that no matter the obstacles people encounter, there is room for them at the table. 

The NIH is limiting DEI initiatives in science research, but what will stop the government from doing the same in other industries? With this approach, who is getting ahead and who is being left behind?