A new study suggests that the Trump administration’s wave of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant terminations in 2025 disproportionately affected Black, Indigenous, and other minority researchers, as well as scientists from sexual and gender minority communities. The authors warn that the targeted disruption of these scientist’s careers may reshape the direction of US health research for years to come.
For the study, researchers led by a team at University of California, San Diego, sent surveys to 1,918 investigators with terminated grants. About half of the investigators (941) responded.
Roughly 2,200 NIH grants were terminated after federal officials began dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and shifting agency priorities last year.
Nearly half identify as BIPOC
The findings, published this week in The Lancet Regional Health Americas, showed that nearly half (48.6%) of investigators whose grants were terminated for equity-related reasons identified as BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), while 60% of investigators whose grant terminations were “gender-related” identified as sexual or gender minorities (SGM), including 16.5% who identified as transgender or nonbinary.
Among all investigators with terminated grants, relative to White men, BIPOC investigators were nearly three times as likely to receive an equity-related termination. BIPOC women and trans and nonbinary investigators were almost two times as likely to receive an equity-related termination, and those who identified as SGM were more than 11 times likelier to have a gender-related termination than cisgender White men.
The share of affected minority researchers surprised the study authors. “We suspected that a large proportion of targeted scientists would hold minoritized identities,” lead author Rebecca Fielding-Miller, PhD, MSPH, associate professor at the University of California, San Diego, tells CIDRAP News.
“But no, I don’t think we were expecting to see numbers that dramatic,” she added. “These data are really unique in terms of being able to speak to so many dimensions of identity that are typically not reported on with regards to NIH-funded investigators.”
Some of the terminated grants were cut with the purported aim of combating antisemitism at specific universities. Roughly one in five investigators affected by “institutional terminations” are Jewish.
“This large proportion is likely because Harvard, Columbia, and Northwestern, which were all early targets of the administration, all have large Jewish communities,” says Fielding-Miller. “But I do think that the 1 in 5 figure demonstrates that these funding freezes were, at the very least, unhelpful on their face.”
Cuts could reshape research for decades
In June 2025, a federal judge ruled that some targeted NIH grant terminations constituted discrimination against racial minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, and women’s health researchers, leading to the reinstatement of a subset of grants. But, the authors warn, even temporary stop-work orders can damage years of relationship-building with communities participating in studies, particularly among populations that may already distrust academic institutions.
The cuts could have a chilling effect on the scope of research projects for years to come. “We are worried that researchers who are unable or unwilling to ‘pivot’ to new topics are going to be systematically removed from the table, which can affect what research will be produced and prioritized for decades beyond this,” says Fielding-Miller.
“Not only will we lose the research these minoritized scientists would have produced individually, but we may also lose all of the mentees that were a part of their labs and the work these mentees would have gone on to produce,” she added. “The ripple effects are tremendous.”
And because NIH funding strongly influences who advances into senior scientific roles and serves on grant-review panels, the disruptions could reduce representation of minority scientists in future funding decisions, with negative consequences for all Americans, argue the authors.
“The NIH is charged with stewarding our taxpayer dollars to conduct research that supports the health of all Americans,” says Fielding-Miller. “The majority of Americans are not White, cisgender men. When the wisdom, voices, and health needs of all Americans are not in the room where decisions get made, we are all going to be worse off.”