
Liam Beran
Bascom Hall.
UW-Madison receives around $1 billion in annual federal funding.
UW-Madison receives around $1 billion in annual federal funding — a quarter of the university’s $4 billion budget — money that pays for countless jobs at the state’s flagship university, and which makes it one of the city’s largest employers. Confusion this week over whether President Donald Trump froze that funding, rescinded that freeze, or complied with a judge’s injunction, has academics worried about more uncertainty, delays and other logistical challenges.
“As one grant ends, the next begins. Any delay in that process can be devastating to a researcher who has to lay off staff, who can't commit to hiring graduate students,” says Dr. Patrick Remington, UW-Madison public health professor emeritus. “Even if the funding turns out not to be delayed, the uncertainty can have a paralyzing effect."
In a Jan. 28 message to researchers and faculty, UW-Madison administrators including Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin called the potential impacts “significant and concerning,” particularly given the university’s status as a large research institution. From 2022-23, the university received more than $952 million in federal research funding, half of which ($478.8 million) came from the National Institutes of Health.
In response to an interview request, UW-Madison spokesperson John Lucas says “we’re unable to accommodate interviews this week.”
“A lot of this seems fairly fluid at the moment,” Lucas says.
The Trump administration initially sparked concern Jan. 21 when it directed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to halt all external communications until a presidential appointee approves them. NPR reported two days later that many National Institutes of Health grant review meetings were canceled.
On Monday evening, an Office of Management and Budget memo directed that all federal fund disbursements — including already-approved grants — be temporarily frozen without a set end date. In a press briefing Tuesday morning, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the pause meant “no more funding” for diversity, equity and inclusion programs, “transgenderism” and “wokeness” across federal agencies.
But with a legal battle and constitutional crisis pending, the OMB withdrew the directive Wednesday afternoon. The White House denies that a federal funding freeze has been rescinded; shortly after the OMB withdrew its directive, Leavitt said “this is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze,” and claimed “the President's EO's [sic] on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
The seeming rescission prompted joy from some congressional Democrats. Others, like Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, cautioned that “this battle is just beginning.”
Even short-term funding delays can have major impacts, academics say. Canceled meetings will have to be rescheduled and disruptions have already been significant.
“It is devastating to a campus like UW — even in the short term — because this can interrupt crucial work, grant submission that has taken years to complete, publication of vital findings to the public and health community, and more,” says Dr. Patrick McBride, also an emeritus UW-Madison professor of public health, in an email to Isthmus. McBride has served on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health panels in the past and calls the organizations’ work “vital to the country and the world.”
“Our hope is that this is very temporary and that we do not have a major pandemic in the meantime,” McBride adds.
Any uncertainty over funding may cause students and researchers to consider other options, Remington says.
Remington participates in a Health Resources and Services Administration grant that provides financial support to residents, faculty and staff in the university’s Preventive Medicine Residency.
“We are very worried about not knowing with certainty that that program will be funded,” Remington says. He’s concerned that the grant’s name — the Training in Equity and Community Health (TEACH) program — may make it a “target, because of the views of the current administration.” As of Tuesday afternoon, the residency was informing applicants that they face funding uncertainties. At the time, the residency was looking for university or philanthropic funding sources to plug any potential budget holes.
Beyond the short term, Remington worries the administration’s approach could intimidate future public health professionals from entering the profession, particularly in areas like health promotion, health equity and health disparities.
Shortly after the Department of Health and Human Services issued its communications freeze, a trainee of his began questioning their decision to apply for work in a federal health agency “given the embargo and political influence in those settings,” he says.
“That's anecdotal information, but it's just common sense,” Remington says. “If you go to work in an agency and your job is to do research and communicate that research so that you can improve public health and that ability to do that is compromised, you're going to second-guess yourself in your career, and you may decide to seek employment elsewhere.”
Remington believes the effect is intentional.
“I think part of the intent of this entire process is to reduce the size of the federal government, reduce the public health workforce, and to cut funding,” says Remington. “One of the ways to accomplish that task is to make the job less appealing. My guess is that it’s going to work.”