‘Imminent threat’: University of Utah could lose $43.5M for research expenses under Trump admin cut

The University of Utah could lose $43.5 million this year in federal funding for medical research expenses — which support projects like the development of new cancer-fighting drugs — if a new cut from the Trump administration moves forward.

On Tuesday, U. President Taylor Randall spoke to faculty members on campus, calling the move from the federal government an “imminent threat” to the lifesaving innovation that happens at the flagship school. Nearly 900 professors and researchers anxiously listened in to learn what impact it might have on their work.

“You all need to know that we are completely dedicated to the research mission of this university,” Randall assured them, promising to push back against the plan.

The U. is the only public research university in Utah that also operates an adjoining hospital, medical system and academic medical program — which includes a significant health research arm. As such, it’s the institution in the state that would be most disrupted by the nationwide cuts.

Just before the discussion started Tuesday, the U.’s renowned Huntsman Cancer Institute had announced groundbreaking research that found patients with endometrial cancer responded equally as well when radiation was done fewer times in higher doses — which could mean fewer hospital visits for those traveling long distances. Those researchers have received funding that would be scaled back under the new directive.

The reduction comes from the National Institutes of Health, under the the purview of U.S. President Donald Trump. The NIH announced Friday on social media that in order to save the government $4 billion, it would significantly cut back the amount it gives institutions to cover “indirect” expenses they incur while conducting agency-funded research. That includes on current grants already underway.

Those costs includes general things that universities pay for like maintaining buildings, providing supplies, having internet access and paying for the utilities that keep a lab running and the lights on. It would also affect wages for personnel, including graduate students and program administrators.

A judge has temporarily stopped the directive from taking effect after 22 universities and several academic organizations filed three separate lawsuits. The U. said Tuesday that it is part of that effort, as a member of the Association of American Medical Colleges and the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities.

The NIH cut is the latest in a barrage of efforts from Trump attacking education since he took office last month, including on Tuesday also separately cutting millions in K-12 research funding conducted through the U.S. Department of Education. An earlier executive order from the president was also paused that would have frozen federal funds, also impacting research and many social programs.

“Some of the recent federal mandates that have come out are upsetting and can be rightly seen as detrimental to our mission,” noted Bob Carter, the U.’s newly named senior vice president for health sciences and CEO of the health care system. “We’re hopeful that cooler heads will prevail in the coming weeks.”

He spoke to faculty virtually, just hours before boarding a plane to arrive in Utah and take on the position in a time of substantial uncertainty.

An initial court hearing in the NIH case will be held next week, on Feb. 21. Randall instructed faculty should move forward with any funded projects, as normal, while the temporary order is in place. “Continue to do your work the way you have been doing it,” he said.

He added that the U. is working on a longer-term plan to keep research fully funded, even if the order is lifted and the cuts are allowed.

“Do we have all the answers right now?” Randall said. “No, we certainly don’t.”

But as some researchers voiced fears, he and other administrators pledged there would be no layoffs and no impact to graduate student work offers or admissions.

NIH funds fuel ‘scientific enterprise’ in Utah

The NIH is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, with a $48 billion budget. But in its announcement last week, the agency said it was going to impose a 15% cap on indirect research costs, which are also referred to as “facilities and administration” costs or “F&A,” for every grant award so it could save money.

The average rates for those costs now is 27%, according to the agency’s records. But they often rise higher for elite universities — 69% at Harvard, for example — and schools that conduct intense research or include a hospital, like the U.

The U.’s rate was most recently set at 54%. So for every dollar that goes to directly research, the University of Utah was getting $0.54 to subsidize the infrastructure necessary for that work. It typically comes as a reimbursement. Lowering the rate means the school won’t receive money it was expecting that would offset existing expenses for research already being conducted.

“Whatever we call them, indirect costs are real,” the University of Utah notes on its website explaining the funding model. “The university is dependent upon the recovery of F&A costs in order to maintain the infrastructure necessary to support sponsored activities.”

The nonprofit Education Reform Now calculated what each state would lose with the new cap, based on NIH grants from 2024. It listed that the U. would lose $43.5 million in funding; the university’s vice president of research, Erin Rothwell, confirmed the calculations during the faculty meeting Tuesday. And a calculation by The Salt Lake Tribune also produced the same number.

Having less money “will slow down science,” she said. Research institutions like the U., she added, “are the backbone of the scientific enterprise for the United States.”

For example, prior to coming to the U., Carter had done trailblazing work to detect and treat the most aggressive type of brain cancer while at Harvard Medical School. For 25 years, he noted, his work was supported by NIH funding.

The cuts, he said, can feel “devaluing” for researchers, who have spent their careers working to change lives and improve patient health. He stood by those projects Tuesday, pushing for U. faculty to stay committed.

Last year, the U. had more than 600 projects that were receiving NIH funding, according to the agency’s website. Those included studies on brain disorders, suicide prevention, opioid abuse, infertility, fibromyalgia, strokes, heart disease, diabetes and even the genetics of impulsivity.

One researcher at the U. is looking at less invasive ways to treat breast cancer. Another is studying the impact of air pollution on cancer, with huge impacts those living through Salt Lake City’s nasty winter inversions. There’s a study specifically on pediatric cancers, too. And another on how best to serve patients with cancer who in rural areas, with the state having plenty of its own health care deserts.

Most of the work done at the U. with NIH money is cancer-related, with 95 of the awards going to that research largely conducted by the Huntsman Cancer Institute.

“We need to communicate the value of science and discoveries that come from federally funded research,” said Neli Ulrich, the chief scientific officer and executive director of the institute’s Comprehensive Cancer Center, during the discussion Tuesday.

The institute, overall, has 280 cancer research teams and 1,800 research employees.

In her own work, Ulrich has done trailblazing research on colorectal cancer prevention and survivorship. Last year, she was awarded the Utah Governor’s Medal for Science and Technology. That’s the kind of work at stake, she said.

U. leaders promise to keep research going

For fiscal 2024, the U. brought in $691 million total in research funds. Money from the NIH made up about one-third of that, with the agency directing $275 million in awards to the school.

Overall, the anticipated loss would be a 6% dip in the U.’s research dollars. Randall said that’s “not a cliff” but still cause for concern.

One U. project that received NIH funding last year is focused on what happens to the frontal lobe of the brain in patients who have Alzheimer’s. To conduct the research, alone, it cost $142,728 directly.

The NIH website notes the project needed $51,302 in indirect costs, though, to operate, putting total cost at just under $200,000.

While there are about 400 primary researchers at the U. listed on the NIH website, Carter added that NIH projects in Utah employ about 4,500 people overall — including researchers, students, staff and administrators — and generate $785 million in economic activity for the state. The impact of the research is far-reaching, even beyond the health benefits, he said.

The U. is now working with state lawmakers, Randall said, and Utah’s federal congressional delegation to challenge the funding cuts. The university president said he’d been in contact with lawmakers for much of Tuesday to explain “why these funds are so important to us.” And Rothwell is visiting Washington, D.C., every two weeks to lobby.

Randall said the U. is also working on “a second long-term strategy” to make sure the school can continue its research mission, even if there are cuts. It’s not clear yet, he added, where the money would come from.

Utah’s eight public institutions of higher education are currently facing budget cuts from the state Legislature this year to the tune of $60 million across the system.

Rothwell said the school has enough money saved in reserves that it could carry out all research through the remainder of the year.

“We’re still in a wait and see situation,” she said. “But we are resilient, and we are ready.”

Some faculty raised questions during the discussion, though, about why Utah wasn’t joining other states directly and leading out in the lawsuit — rather than by proxy through associations it has membership in.

Jakob Jensen, the U.’s associate vice president for research, said those associations advised that they carry the lawsuit as a consortium. Also, a decision to intervene would also have to come from the Utah attorney general’s office.

A request for comment on whether Utah Attorney General Derek Brown was considering that was not immediately returned.

But Randall, Rothwell and Mitzi Montoya, the U.’s senior vice president for academic affairs, all repeated several times that there would be no layoffs of researchers and no impact on graduate student employees. There is also no hiring freeze.

“I know you all are deeply committed to your graduate students, as we are as an institution,” Montoya said.

The school also said it will continue to apprise faculty of changes. That will come through weekly town hall meetings for updates on Tuesdays and weekly open forums with administrators on Fridays where professors can ask questions.

The U. is also posting updates on its research website at: research.utah.edu/resources/updates-on-federal-funding.

In one of the latest updates, the school noted that the button on the NIH website to extend projects had been removed, but researchers had still been receiving notices of awards as of last week.

Other Utah universities, nonprofits impacted

As an entire state, Utah would see a $45.9 million deduction overall, with the U. making up the lion’s share of that at 95%.

The remainder of the cuts comes from two other schools and two nonprofits.

Brigham Young University, a private school, is set to lose $1.3 million. Its studies have mostly looked at genetics, with 19 awards from the agency last year.

Utah State University, the other public research institution in the state, was forecast to not receive $646,000 this year; the research there, as a land grant school, focuses more on agriculture and land than medicine. It received 30 grants from the NIH last year, with many of those studying viruses.

Outgoing USU President Elizabeth “Betsy” Cantwell told lawmakers during a meeting late last month that she was bracing for cuts from the NIH, which have been talked about on and off for decades.

Recently, it was mentioned as a strategy in the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which many have viewed as a playbook for the Trump administration.

“We will see a year where probably our total research funding drops, because it’ll be hard for the federal agencies to rethink their research award plans in a few weeks,” she said. “… I think we are well poised so that we may see a year of not devastation, but downturn in our research funding.”

The two nonprofits in the state that receive NIH funding and would also see cuts are Intermountain Health, for a $503,000 reduction, and the Utah Navajo Health System for roughly $27,600.