...
By Andrew Stanton
Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
GOP Senator Susan Collins has slammed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) directive to implement a 15 percent rate cap on indirect costs to medical research grants.
Newsweek reached out via email to the White House and Collins' office for further comment.
Why It Matters
When a researcher receives a research grant, the person's institution will also receive additional funds, known as "indirect costs," that go toward infrastructure such as utilities, maintenance or administrative costs, lessening the burden on these institutions. The exact percentage is negotiated between the NIH and each institution.
Read More on News
This means that if an institution had a 50 percent rate in 2024, it would receive $150,000 for a $100,000 grant, with $50,000 in indirect costs. After the new directive, that would drop to $115,000.
Maine, where Collins is from, is among the states that could be most affected by the cap. Grants to Maine medical research institutions averaged a 45.7 percent rate on indirect costs in 2024, higher than any other state, according to data from the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research.
What To Know
Collins objected to the cap in a statement first reported by Punchbowl News' Max Cohen.
"I oppose the poorly conceived directive imposing an arbitrary cap on the indirect costs that are part of NIH grants and negotiated between the grant recipient and NIH," she wrote. She added that she has heard from several institutions in her state that are concerned about the cuts.
...
Collins said she raised these concerns with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump's pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services, and he "promised that as soon as he is confirmed, he will reexamine this initiative that was implemented prior to his confirmation."
The NIH wrote in a post to X (formerly Twitter) announcing the cap that it would save taxpayers more than $4 billion each year, noting that 15 percent is what major foundations will allow for indirect costs. Trump has emphasized cutting federal spending since returning to the White House last month.
But the announcement quickly drew pushback from researchers, who warned the cuts would result in fewer funds for medical researchers.
Collins' criticism comes as she faces a potentially difficult reelection in Maine, a state that backed Vice President Kamala Harris by about 7 points in 2024. Collins has been a strong candidate in the past, winning consistently in the Democratic-leaning state. But Democrats hope that if 2026 is a strong year for the party, they will be able to topple Collins with a strong candidate.
What People Are Saying
Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities President Mark Becker said in a statement: "NIH slashing the reimbursement of research costs will slow and limit medical breakthroughs that cure cancer and address chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease. Let there be no mistake: this is a direct and massive cut to lifesaving medical research. We urge the administration to reconsider this self-defeating action.
White House spokesperson Kush Desai in a statement: "Contrary to the hysteria, redirecting billions of allocated NIH spending away from administrative bloat means there will be more money and resources available for legitimate scientific research, not less."
What Happens Next
The NIH action has already drawn a legal challenge. On Monday, 22 attorneys general filed a lawsuit challenging the cap, which they say violates the federal Administrative Procedure Act.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines