Key takeaways:
- A national survey of 941 scientists whose National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants were terminated in 2025 found the cuts disproportionately affected minority researchers.
- Researchers from marginalized groups were both overrepresented among those whose grants were canceled and more likely to have their work specifically targeted for termination.
- The findings suggest the policy changes may deepen existing disparities in the U.S. biomedical research workforce.
Researchers from University of California San Diego Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science have found that recent federal grant terminations targeting research on health equity and gender identity have disproportionately affected scientists from the very communities those studies aim to support. The findings were published May 5, 2026 in The Lancet Regional Health – Americas.
"These grant terminations didn't just disrupt specific research projects, they also disrupted the careers of many scientists who study the health of marginalized communities," said Rebecca Fielding-Miller, PhD, associate professor at the UC San Diego Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science and senior author of the study. "When funding for these topics disappears, the researchers with the deepest expertise in them are often the ones most directly affected."
The NIH is the world's largest public funder of biomedical research, investing roughly $47 billion annually. Because of the scale of this investment, American research priorities help shape the direction of health science innovations globally.
Between January and May 2025, the NIH terminated more than 2,000 research grants after shifting agency priorities. Many of the affected grants focused on health disparities, including research related to BIPOC communities and sexual and gender minorities. In addition, about 600 grants were canceled through institution-wide actions aimed at addressing alleged campus antisemitism.
To understand who was most affected, the research team surveyed investigators whose terminated grants were documented in the Grant Witness database. Of 1,918 investigators invited to participate, 941 completed the survey. In order to categorize terminations by justification, investigators were asked to select from eight possible reasons for the termination. For example, participants were considered to have received an equity-related termination if they indicated their grant was terminated due to "amorphous equity objectives," and a gender-related termination if they indicated their grant was terminated due to "gender identity."
The analysis found that nearly half (48.6%) of investigators whose grants were terminated for equity-related reasons identified as BIPOC. Among grants terminated for gender-related reasons, 60% of investigators identified as sexual or gender minorities, including 16.5% who were transgender or nonbinary. Disparities extended beyond simple representation. Among investigators whose grants were terminated, BIPOC women and transgender or nonbinary researchers had nearly three times higher odds of receiving an equity-related termination than White men. Sexual and gender minority investigators were more than 11 times more likely to receive a gender-related termination than heterosexual, cisgender researchers.
The study also found that 20.5% of investigators affected by institution-wide terminations tied to alleged antisemitism identified as Jewish, raising questions about the effectiveness of those actions as a mechanism to protect Jewish researchers.
The findings build on earlier research showing that disparities already exist in the biomedical funding system. Previous studies have found that scientists from underrepresented backgrounds are more likely to study health disparities or community-based topics that historically receive less funding.
"When funding disruptions disproportionately affect researchers who focus on health disparities, the consequences go far beyond individual careers," Fielding-Miller said. "They also shape which scientific questions get asked, and whose health ultimately receives attention."
The authors warn that the effects could persist for years. Because research careers and funding success tend to build cumulatively over time, losing even a single grant can derail projects, disrupt community partnerships and limit future funding opportunities, particularly for early-career investigators.
Looking ahead, the researchers say restoring and sustaining funding for equity-related health research will be critical to maintaining a diverse scientific workforce and ensuring that biomedical research reflects the needs of all communities.
"If we want a scientific enterprise that serves everyone," Fielding-Miller said, "we have to ensure that scientists studying the health of marginalized communities are able to continue their work."
Link to full study: Targeted termination of scientific grants and minoritised researcher status in a national survey
Additional co-authors on the study include: Natalie Vawter, MPH, and Laramie R. Smith, PhD, from UC San Diego. Nicholas Metheny, PhD, from Emory University. Abigail M. Hatcher, from University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Sarah Peitzmeier, PhD, from University of Maryland, College Park.
The authors received no external funding for this study.
