The University of Utah faces a possible loss of $ 50 million with a blocked Trump policy – Deseret News

The University of Utah is in danger of losing approximately $ 50 million in grants for medical research annually because of the proposed change in the Trump administration, staff at the University of Tuesday said.

The university held Pep talks about researchers on Tuesday, led by President Taylor Randall, where they were told to remain the course as the battle for politics plays in court. He said the school also worked with state and federal legislators on the subject.

Randal and other university leaders in Utah will be affected by a change of policy at national health institutes that would limit how many overhead researchers they can request when applying for grants. Officials from the State University of Utah and the University of Brigham Young did not immediately respond to requests to comment on how they could be affected.

At the end of Monday, Federal Judge temporarily blocked NIH from the implementation of the new policy. A hearing to review the temporary restraining order is scheduled for February 21.

According to the new policy, a restriction of the amount that grant recipients may request “indirect” costs – funds that the recipients of grants can use for facility and administrative expenses will be determined. Researchers could request no more than 15% of the total amount of grant under the new policy.

The Trump administration announced the new policy on Friday. In its note, outlining the change of grant policy, NIH noted that the United States should have the best medical research in the world -so it is vital to ensure that the most funds go for direct costs for scientific scientific costs as possible Research, not to administrative overheads. “

The medical research community in the country immediately protested against the change – claiming that it would undermine the breakthroughs in cancer, diabetes and other studies of the disease.

Researchers at Utah University: is coming ahead

The University of Utah’s research community is deeply linked to NIH. The leading university of the country, which houses the only medical school for the provision of a medical degree to Utah, received $ 291 million in grant at NIH in 2023.

In the meantime, the initial estimates of the lost “indirect” funding from the proposed abbreviations of NIH are approximately $ 50 million, according to the school spokesman Rebecca Walsh.

On Tuesday, university leaders met with the school’s research community for the City Hall to increase scale to provide updates on the evolving number – while offering an institutional PEP talk with anxious researchers.

Their message: We are sustainable. We are ready.

The University of Utah’s Vice President Erin Rotwell has begun with the highlight of the institution’s shared commitment to progress in research, innovation and opening. “Our institution,” she said, “has long been at the forefront of innovative work and we are committed to strengthening this heritage.”

Dr. Bob Carter, a doctor and veteran medical researcher, who was recently hired as the CEO of the University of Utah, sounded the elementary role that science plays in the creation of new therapies, treatments and strategies for approaching human health.

“This is an incredibly exciting reason why the University of Utah, its laboratories, its main researchers, its scientists are so important,” he said.

NIH’s latest mandates added Carter, “upset” – and could be perceived as harmful to the university’s research mission.

“We hope that the cool heads will prevail in the coming weeks,” he said. “We are actively working to understand the full impact of this change in the financial and social level and how we go our work forward. … We have to progress forward. “

Carter emphasized the economic impact of the Federal Study Funded in the Ecosystem of Utah.

“In Utah, NIH funding supports over 4,500 jobs and almost $ 785 million in economic activity,” he said. “And the organic industry … maintains over 40,000 jobs and almost 1800 businesses.”

Be sustainable, united and focused, he added. “It will be an opportunity for us to show what we are made of.”

Calls for intercession for medical research

Randal said the school administrators still formulated answers to NIH’s challenge, but he formulated short and long -term strategies.

In the short term, he said, the temporary restraining order issued by the courts on Monday, “will allow us to continue to do our work.”

So, Randal called on the researchers, “Go to your job as you were.”

In the meantime, the long -term strategy is attached to intercession, he said.

“This will happen both locally, in our legislative body, but also on a national scale with our federal delegation,” he said. “We have already contacted our federal delegation many times … taking the position of the university and why these funds are actually so important to all of us.”

Randal assured the researchers that the University “always maintained” a strong financial situation.

“I do not believe we are facing a rock, but we are certainly facing an immediate problem, an immediate threat,” he said. “Over the next few weeks, we will be able to provide more detailed information about how we can deal with the different effects with this.”

Rotwell said the school would continue to work with partners in the medical research community to navigate the legitimate waters while responding to changes to NIH. Meanwhile, she said, university researchers should “continue to work and submit their grants as normal.”

The University of Utah’s Provision Mitsi Montoya said the problem with NIH is not currently affecting postgraduate procedures. “We do not stop with the admissible confessions.”

The nation is three weeks in the Trump administration, Rotwell noted – “And it remains very uncertain.”

However, she was able to respond to several urgent inquiries from the school’s research community:

First, will there be cuts?

– No. We are engaged with our employees and all the wonderful administrators of staff and research that support our institution. “

And second, will there be a freezing of hiring?

“No, not at that moment – and I don’t predict one.”

Rotwell also replied to NIH’s claim that the “indirect” expenses practiced by award -winning private foundations offer federal government templates to follow.

This is not a comparison “apples to apples,” she said. The survey related to private foundations, according to her, is radically different from the discovery “or basic science” that research institutions carry out.

Updated NIH policy: Opposite votes

Beyond the campus of the University of Utah, the updated NIH grant policy provokes ardent calls for opposition – and support.

The Association of Public and Grates has warned that NIH’s actions will “slow down and limit medical breakthroughs that treat cancer and address chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease.”

The Association of American Medical Colleges also claims that the Trump administration’s actions to change grant policies will lead to “irreparable harm to the research mission – leaving no choice but to scale research activities.

“This can mean less clinical trials, less fundamental studies to detect and more slow progress in achieving the rescue progress of patients and families who have time to delay.”

Meanwhile, White House spokesman Kush Deza rejected the hostile response to NIH’s new policy as “hysteria”.

“The redirection of billions of allocated NIH costs away from administrative swelling means that there will be more money and resources for legitimate research, no less,” Deza said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

On its X site, the Ministry of Government praised the modified federal medical policy: “Incredible work from the @nih team. Saves> $ 4B per year with excessive administrative costs. “

Dr. Vinay Prasad, a doctor and a health researcher and a popular figure in social media, insists that Trump is right to cut the gratuitous “indirect”.

“This money is largely impossible for the American people,” Prasad writes. “A well -known researcher likes to say that” the NIH dollar is more award than any other dollar “precisely because money can be used for any purpose.”

In 2023, it reported that NIH had spent more than $ 35 billion on almost $ 50,000 competing for over 2,500 US universities, medical schools and other research institutions.

“From this funding, approximately $ 26 billion went for direct research costs, while $ 9 billion was allocated for overhead costs by the NIH indirect price,” according to NIH report.