Federal sequestration's possible influence on MIT research explored by Zuber

Federal sequestration's possible influence on MIT research explored by Zuber

In a letter sent to all MIT principal investigators and research administrators on February 27, Maria Zuber, MIT's vice president for research and the E.A. Griswold Professor of Geophysics, highlighted the potential impacts of the federal government's automatic budget cuts, known as "sequestration," on the institution.

The letter outlines the possible effects of these cuts, which are expected to take effect on March 1, on MIT and other research institutions across the United States. Zuber emphasised that sequestration, resulting from large deficit increases, would trigger automatic across-the-board spending reductions for mandatory programs, including scientific research funding.

Key impacts of these cuts include:

1. Drastic reductions in research grants: Federal agencies funding research at universities, such as the Department of Energy (DOE) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), could face steep cuts. For example, DOE’s ARPA-E program saw proposed budget cuts of over 50%, and changes to indirect cost rates for grants to institutions like MIT could further strain research funding capacity.
2. Institutional financial strain: Policies lowering indirect cost rates paid to institutions on grants reduce the overhead funds that support research infrastructure. DOE recently capped indirect cost rates at 15%, down from negotiated rates up to 62% at some institutions. This threatens the ability of institutions like MIT to absorb research costs and maintain robust research activities.
3. Potential elimination or severe limitation of USDA and other agency research programs: Sequestration risks wiping out funding for multiple USDA research units and other science-related programs essential for innovation and training.
4. Uncertainty and hesitance in grant applications: Lower funding and burdensome cuts may discourage universities from pursuing federal research grants aggressively, potentially reducing the overall research output and innovation ecosystem.

Zuber urged Congress to actively waive or mitigate these sequestration requirements to safeguard critical research investments. If unaddressed, the sequestration cuts could severely disrupt federally supported scientific research at top institutions like MIT, hampering long-term technological advancement and innovation.

In response to these potential challenges, the Washington Office of MIT has established a reserve for "hardship" cases. Principal Investigators (PIs) are expected to share this memo and additional information, as it becomes available, with staff who may be concerned about the effects of proposed cuts. PIs are also advised to maintain contact with their program officers for specific information.

For more information, readers can refer to the notices from the National Institutes of Health (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-13-043.html) and the National Science Foundation (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/in133/in133.pdf). Further details can also be found on the Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) at MIT's website (osp.mit.edu).

Additional resources: - AIP.org article on sequestration - Washington Post article on sequestration's impact on federal agencies

1. The federal government's automatic budget cuts, known as sequestration, could significantly impact MIT's research activities stemming from reduced scientific research funding.
2. The potential impacts of sequestration on research institutions across the country, including MIT, are outlined in a letter sent by Maria Zuber, the vice president for research at MIT.
3. Sequestration, a result of large deficit increases, will trigger automatic spending reductions for mandatory programs, including those involving energy, environmental, and medical-conditions research.
4. The Department of Energy (DOE) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), among other federal agencies, could face drastic reductions in research grants due to sequestration.
5. Institutions like MIT face an increased financial strain due to changes in indirect cost rates for grants, which could further strangle research funding capacity.
6. The uncertainty and hesitance in grant applications from universities could potentially reduce the overall research output and innovation ecosystem.
7. In an effort to safeguard critical research investments, Zuber urges Congress to actively waive or mitigate these sequestration requirements.
8. For comprehensive coverage on this topic, readers can refer to articles from AIP.org and The Washington Post, as well as notices from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, and further details can be found on the Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) at MIT's website.

Read also: