Recommended Research Funding
FY 2027 Recommended Funding
The federal government is viewed as the primary driver of U.S. science and technology advancements. Federal investments in fundamental research have led to remarkable progress in the biological and biomedical sciences – an increasingly multidisciplinary team-based effort. These collaborative research efforts have enabled investigators to respond to pressing scientific and medical challenges. Basic or fundamental research was the groundwork for the speed – months instead of years – that led to the development of COVID-19 vaccines and also supports pre-clinical research involving the use of animal studies necessary to evaluate whole-body effects when testing new drugs or treatments achieve medical progress.
A major contributing factor to the success of team science is the mobilization of core facilities and shared research resources (SRRs) including the scientific technology and expertise infrastructure within research organizations. SRRs and cores work across different scientific disciplines and deliver unbiased research data in support of scientific rigor and transparency. They are essential training grounds for the next generation of skills-based scientists from diverse backgrounds. However, the next generation of researchers and the biomedical ecosystem have already seen immediate and lasting negative impacts from activities such as unlawful grant terminations and mass terminations of federal employees without understanding their responsibilities in grant making or key administrative roles.
Despite Congress’ bipartisan support for investing in science, federal funding for research has not kept pace with scientific opportunity, posing a threat to our nation’s competitiveness. We face a real threat of losing our edge in industries such as biotechnology if we do not continue to prioritize increasing investments in science, shared resource facilities, including core facilities, and building a workforce reflective of the needs of America’s multifaceted and geographically diverse population.1 The U.S. spends less on research and development (R&D) than many countries. If the U.S. is to be prepared to respond to future threats, our scientific leadership must progress. According to a 2025 analysis from Science Is Us, more than 73.6 million workers in the U.S. are professionals in science, technology, engineering, math and medicine (STEMM) fields, an increase of 9.7 percent between 2021 and 2013, and they drive the American economy, accounting for 39 percent of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product.2
The federal government should commit to robust, predictable, and sustained funding increases for science agencies that fund investigator led research initiatives. FASEB applauds Congress’ efforts to also continue to defend against the administration’s push to cap Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs at 15 percent across agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, and the Department of Energy and the directive to involve stakeholders in developing a new transparent model.3
FASEB’s fiscal year (FY) 2027 funding recommendations are as follows:
NIH is the nation’s largest public funder of biomedical research in the world providing competitive grants to support the work of 300,000 scientists at universities, medical centers, independent research institutions, and companies nationwide. However, an August 7, 2025 White House Executive Order would change the grant review process and possibly reduce the chances of a scientist obtaining an NIH grant or the overall success rate, which was already in the low 20th percentile.4 NIH funded investigators across the U.S. can also attract partners and investors to take innovation to market through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. Federally funded researchers drive robust economic activity directly and indirectly in their communities while also supporting the pharmaceutical industry through the development of new knowledge.5
The biomedical discoveries, innovations, and treatments that NIH supports are possible because of scientific research with animals used when necessary to provide in-depth knowledge of entire biological systems and complex disorders affecting multiple organs. As required by the Food and Drug Administration, animal research is also essential during the preclinical stage of drug development to determine the safety and efficacy of potential drugs and therapies prior to human clinical trials.6,6
NIH-funded investigators demonstrated the effective ability to harness animal research and maximize public-private partnerships by collaborating with industry to develop a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine which was quickly adapted for COVID-19.7 However, this technology also holds much promise for gene therapy, fighting cancer, and infectious diseases, including flu, by telling the body’s cell to produce proteins that train the immune system to defend the body.8 The agency also accelerated the development and commercialization of COVID testing through the Radx initiative.9 NIH and researchers supported by the agency learned crucial lessons in supporting science, improving response efforts when a pandemic pathogen emerges, and moving research from findings in the lab to the clinic due to its response to COVID-19. These lessons will improve cross-sector initiatives to inform future public health research responses.10
There is also the need to keep pace with the persistently increasing costs of research. Scientists are still fighting inflation at the bench requiring careful management of grant funding. Other significant changes from 2025 saw NIH make major changes in grant policies, the award process, and the total number of grants awarded. The topic of multiyear funding, also known as forward funding, has come to the forefront. Multiyear funding (MYF) awards are made to provide full funding for grants up front for all years of a grant’s project period, which can span several years. The result is a reduction in the number of total NIH grants awarded in any given year, triggering publicly expressed congressional and community concern that this policy will significantly reduce the number of grants NIH can fund in FY 2026 and beyond. FASEB believes implementation should be done in a way that is least disruptive to the research ecosystem over an extended window of time. Congress should appropriate the full cost of any shift in award outlays due to MYF, so the funding rates do not decline.
Additionally, the less than thoughtful approach starting in February 2025 of the mass termination of grants at NIH based on ideological reasons has had a negative impact on the integrity of the research ecosystem from suppliers to end users. In the federal court case of American Public Health Association v. NIH, on June 16, 2025, the district court agreed that it was unlawful, arbitrary and capricious for NIH to terminate grants involving disfavored topics of Alzheimer’s, LGBTQ+ health, HIV, etc. These abrupt grant terminations disrupted the flow of funding which had an immediate impact on researchers. For example, early career scientists had to decide whether to remain as a NIH researcher or leave academia when they cannot obtain NIH funding. Lack of certainty left them in limbo and has already jeopardized ongoing research and clinical trials that could save lives. Some researchers have even had offer letters rescinded due to employers facing uncertainty in the funding landscape. A brief pause in NIH funding can increase research personnel unemployment by 40 percent and reduce publication rates by 90 percent.11 Only as of December 29, 2025 has NIH decided under an agreement to use their standard process to review stalled applications that the agency originally rejected due to ideological rather than scientific reasons in 2025.12 On June 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit heard oral arguments challenging NIH grant terminations.
Another issue impacting federal agencies such as NIH is F&A costs also known as indirect costs which are used to pay expenses not specific to any one research project but to maintain the infrastructure and administrative support to conduct federally funded research. The administration sought to cap the cost at 15 percent for NIH grants, but on January 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit pushed back in their unanimous opinion to prevent the change. FASEB is supportive of Congress working with the Joint Association Group (JAG) and others to create a new approach to identify and recover indirect cost recovery by reviewing the Financial Accountability in Research (FAIR) model developed as a response to concerns about F&A’s complexity and transparency. A final model is still undecided as of this writing.
In the U.S., we must also continue to address the needs of a growing aging population and the serious disease of obesity.13,14 NIH-funded research is developing therapies for a whole spectrum of age-related disorders.15 Obesity impacts 42 percent of the U.S. population and increases the likelihood of developing costly medical conditions such as diabetes, cancer, and heart disease and is a substantial obstacle to military recruitment.16,17 Additionally, minority populations experience a higher prevalence of these diseases.18 Our nation also faces a significantly widening gap in life expectancy between men and women. Life expectancy for men fell to 73, nearly six years less than for women and the largest gap since 1996, due to the opioid epidemic and COVID-19 impacting men more.19,20 To address not only the life span issue but the health span of Americans, NIH has a unified strategy to align the agency’s priorities and funding to focus on chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes and obesity utilizing AI tools and real world data platforms and pursuing replication and reproducibility and replicability among other things.21 More – not less – research will be needed to address infectious diseases, long COVID, and the over 10,000 rare diseases with zero or few treatment options while still making progress on more common diseases.22
Our recommendation of at least $51.3 billion for NIH is $4.087 billion or 8.7 percent increase above the comparable FY 2026 enacted level. With that funding level, NIH will have the resources needed to accelerate progress across all areas of medical science, including regenerative medicine, cancer immunotherapy, and neurological health.23,24 The agency will also be able to continue its commitment to supporting the next generation of our biomedical research enterprise.25
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $51.3 billion for NIH. Funding for ARPA-H should supplement rather than supplant the NIH budget as intended by ARPA-H's authorization.
The biomedical discoveries, innovations, and treatments that NIH supports are possible because of scientific research with animals used when necessary to provide in-depth knowledge of entire biological systems and complex disorders affecting multiple organs. As required by the Food and Drug Administration, animal research is also essential during the preclinical stage of drug development to determine the safety and efficacy of potential drugs and therapies prior to human clinical trials.6,6
NIH-funded investigators demonstrated the effective ability to harness animal research and maximize public-private partnerships by collaborating with industry to develop a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine which was quickly adapted for COVID-19.7 However, this technology also holds much promise for gene therapy, fighting cancer, and infectious diseases, including flu, by telling the body’s cell to produce proteins that train the immune system to defend the body.8 The agency also accelerated the development and commercialization of COVID testing through the Radx initiative.9 NIH and researchers supported by the agency learned crucial lessons in supporting science, improving response efforts when a pandemic pathogen emerges, and moving research from findings in the lab to the clinic due to its response to COVID-19. These lessons will improve cross-sector initiatives to inform future public health research responses.10
There is also the need to keep pace with the persistently increasing costs of research. Scientists are still fighting inflation at the bench requiring careful management of grant funding. Other significant changes from 2025 saw NIH make major changes in grant policies, the award process, and the total number of grants awarded. The topic of multiyear funding, also known as forward funding, has come to the forefront. Multiyear funding (MYF) awards are made to provide full funding for grants up front for all years of a grant’s project period, which can span several years. The result is a reduction in the number of total NIH grants awarded in any given year, triggering publicly expressed congressional and community concern that this policy will significantly reduce the number of grants NIH can fund in FY 2026 and beyond. FASEB believes implementation should be done in a way that is least disruptive to the research ecosystem over an extended window of time. Congress should appropriate the full cost of any shift in award outlays due to MYF, so the funding rates do not decline.
Additionally, the less than thoughtful approach starting in February 2025 of the mass termination of grants at NIH based on ideological reasons has had a negative impact on the integrity of the research ecosystem from suppliers to end users. In the federal court case of American Public Health Association v. NIH, on June 16, 2025, the district court agreed that it was unlawful, arbitrary and capricious for NIH to terminate grants involving disfavored topics of Alzheimer’s, LGBTQ+ health, HIV, etc. These abrupt grant terminations disrupted the flow of funding which had an immediate impact on researchers. For example, early career scientists had to decide whether to remain as a NIH researcher or leave academia when they cannot obtain NIH funding. Lack of certainty left them in limbo and has already jeopardized ongoing research and clinical trials that could save lives. Some researchers have even had offer letters rescinded due to employers facing uncertainty in the funding landscape. A brief pause in NIH funding can increase research personnel unemployment by 40 percent and reduce publication rates by 90 percent.11 Only as of December 29, 2025 has NIH decided under an agreement to use their standard process to review stalled applications that the agency originally rejected due to ideological rather than scientific reasons in 2025.12 On June 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit heard oral arguments challenging NIH grant terminations.
Another issue impacting federal agencies such as NIH is F&A costs also known as indirect costs which are used to pay expenses not specific to any one research project but to maintain the infrastructure and administrative support to conduct federally funded research. The administration sought to cap the cost at 15 percent for NIH grants, but on January 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit pushed back in their unanimous opinion to prevent the change. FASEB is supportive of Congress working with the Joint Association Group (JAG) and others to create a new approach to identify and recover indirect cost recovery by reviewing the Financial Accountability in Research (FAIR) model developed as a response to concerns about F&A’s complexity and transparency. A final model is still undecided as of this writing.
In the U.S., we must also continue to address the needs of a growing aging population and the serious disease of obesity.13,14 NIH-funded research is developing therapies for a whole spectrum of age-related disorders.15 Obesity impacts 42 percent of the U.S. population and increases the likelihood of developing costly medical conditions such as diabetes, cancer, and heart disease and is a substantial obstacle to military recruitment.16,17 Additionally, minority populations experience a higher prevalence of these diseases.18 Our nation also faces a significantly widening gap in life expectancy between men and women. Life expectancy for men fell to 73, nearly six years less than for women and the largest gap since 1996, due to the opioid epidemic and COVID-19 impacting men more.19,20 To address not only the life span issue but the health span of Americans, NIH has a unified strategy to align the agency’s priorities and funding to focus on chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes and obesity utilizing AI tools and real world data platforms and pursuing replication and reproducibility and replicability among other things.21 More – not less – research will be needed to address infectious diseases, long COVID, and the over 10,000 rare diseases with zero or few treatment options while still making progress on more common diseases.22
Our recommendation of at least $51.3 billion for NIH is $4.087 billion or 8.7 percent increase above the comparable FY 2026 enacted level. With that funding level, NIH will have the resources needed to accelerate progress across all areas of medical science, including regenerative medicine, cancer immunotherapy, and neurological health.23,24 The agency will also be able to continue its commitment to supporting the next generation of our biomedical research enterprise.25
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $51.3 billion for NIH. Funding for ARPA-H should supplement rather than supplant the NIH budget as intended by ARPA-H's authorization.
With a mandate to support fundamental research across all fields of science, engineering, and mathematics, the NSF was established in 1950 in recognition of the role that the scientific enterprise played in the Allied success in World War II. It is the cornerstone of our nation’s scientific and innovation enterprise while also advancing our security and economic interests. Through the Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP), NSF will be better able to collaborate with other stakeholders to translate fundamental research into commercially viable products and services enhancing our competitiveness on the global stage. In December 2025, the forward-thinking directorate introduced a public data platform to provide transparency on how NSF allocates its funding across emerging technology areas.26
In general, federal agencies have seen large numbers of employees terminated from federal service or taking buy out packages, which has impacted the grant approval process and slowed interactions with applicants seeking answers about the status of their applications. Currently, NSF faces challenges from dedicating resources to moving its headquarters to a new location in Alexandria, Virginia in the first quarter of 2026, and working with 10 percent fewer staff due to cuts in 2025.
Congress also has not yet provided the agency with its authorized level of $16.7 billion for FY 2025 under the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act which aimed to give the agency a substantial budget boost to spur economic growth, but instead provided $9.06 billion under the year-long continuing resolution in FY 2025. In FY 2026, NSF’s budget of $8.75 billion represented a $310 million decrease compared to FY 2025. Without new funds, the agency will not expand as quickly to meet the urgent needs in emerging industries such as AI, which the NSF has invested in since the 1960s, building a resilient planet, and supporting workforce efforts to scale our science and innovation ecosystem as the U.S. competes for STEM talent. These include scaling the Regional Innovation Engines program supporting innovation in geographies that have not received the full benefits of technological advancements in decades where failure to sustain leadership would cede economic growth, national security advantages and control over the shape of the international system that suits the prevailing country dominating in tomorrow’s technologies integrating AI, biotechnology and quantum.
Among federal science agencies, NSF has the unique capacity to:
Our recommendation of at least $11.89 billion for NSF is $3.1 billion or 36 percent increase above the FY 2026 enacted level of $8.75 billion. This will allow NSF to further attract highly qualified early-career researchers, fund more high-quality research proposals, and increase NSF’s average award size.32 In addition to supporting the Biological Sciences, this funding level will support NSF’s new TIP Directorate, which will work with all of NSF’s directorates and offices to advance the impacts of NSF-funded research by accelerating the translation of fundamental science and engineering discoveries into innovative new technologies and solutions to address the country’s societal, national, and geostrategic challenges. With a historic investment in fundamental research and education, the U.S. can meet the Golden Age of American Innovation to secure the U.S. as the unrivaled world leader in critical and emerging technologies, revitalize our scientific enterprise, and ensure innovation that fuels economic growth and improves the lives of all Americans.33
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $11.89 billion for NSF.
In general, federal agencies have seen large numbers of employees terminated from federal service or taking buy out packages, which has impacted the grant approval process and slowed interactions with applicants seeking answers about the status of their applications. Currently, NSF faces challenges from dedicating resources to moving its headquarters to a new location in Alexandria, Virginia in the first quarter of 2026, and working with 10 percent fewer staff due to cuts in 2025.
Congress also has not yet provided the agency with its authorized level of $16.7 billion for FY 2025 under the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act which aimed to give the agency a substantial budget boost to spur economic growth, but instead provided $9.06 billion under the year-long continuing resolution in FY 2025. In FY 2026, NSF’s budget of $8.75 billion represented a $310 million decrease compared to FY 2025. Without new funds, the agency will not expand as quickly to meet the urgent needs in emerging industries such as AI, which the NSF has invested in since the 1960s, building a resilient planet, and supporting workforce efforts to scale our science and innovation ecosystem as the U.S. competes for STEM talent. These include scaling the Regional Innovation Engines program supporting innovation in geographies that have not received the full benefits of technological advancements in decades where failure to sustain leadership would cede economic growth, national security advantages and control over the shape of the international system that suits the prevailing country dominating in tomorrow’s technologies integrating AI, biotechnology and quantum.
Among federal science agencies, NSF has the unique capacity to:
- Support multi-disciplinary research: By leveraging its portfolio across the sciences, NSF funds cutting-edge research at the interface of the physical, biological, and social sciences with three main areas of focus including cross cutting programs involving big data, areas of national importance such as AI and understanding the rules of life, and center competitions that bring interdisciplinary research teams together to support new scientific paradigms and engage a diverse talent pool.27
- Organize and lead research partnerships at speed and scale: The NSF coordinates and leads interagency research endeavors, including partnerships with NIH and DOE SC. These collaborations, both domestic and foreign, advance public health and energy, the development of artificial intelligence, and other national priorities.28
- Train the next generation of scientists from diverse backgrounds: NSF plays a key role in creating educational pathways and supporting the accessibility of scientific education, training scientists from diverse backgrounds to increase inclusivity in science, advancing AI, and promoting national security. These scientists – some of whom will become entrepreneurs – will work across different scientific disciplines and broaden participation in science and engineering among underrepresented and diverse groups.29
Our recommendation of at least $11.89 billion for NSF is $3.1 billion or 36 percent increase above the FY 2026 enacted level of $8.75 billion. This will allow NSF to further attract highly qualified early-career researchers, fund more high-quality research proposals, and increase NSF’s average award size.32 In addition to supporting the Biological Sciences, this funding level will support NSF’s new TIP Directorate, which will work with all of NSF’s directorates and offices to advance the impacts of NSF-funded research by accelerating the translation of fundamental science and engineering discoveries into innovative new technologies and solutions to address the country’s societal, national, and geostrategic challenges. With a historic investment in fundamental research and education, the U.S. can meet the Golden Age of American Innovation to secure the U.S. as the unrivaled world leader in critical and emerging technologies, revitalize our scientific enterprise, and ensure innovation that fuels economic growth and improves the lives of all Americans.33
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $11.89 billion for NSF.
The DOE Office of Science (DOE SC)’s mission is the delivery of scientific discoveries and major scientific tools such as its three world-leading supercomputers, to transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic, and national security of the U.S. It is also the nation’s largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences and supports over 27,900 researchers including PhDs, postdoctoral associates, graduate students, and other scientific personnel at over 300 universities. Nearly 43,000 users engage with its 28 user facilities, supporting research spanning all 50 states and Puerto Rico, Guam, and Washington, DC. It has also produced over 120 Nobel prize winning scientists.34 The facilities and personnel supported by DOE SC operate at the intersection of basic and applied sciences and include critical fields such as biological sciences and high-performance computing. Transformative innovations and technologies can be traced to their work, including solar cells, superconductors, and nanotechnology.35 36
Agencies like NIH, NSF, and DOE SC work in concert to advance research in key areas including artificial intelligence and genomics.37 38 The Office of Science is in charge of 10 of the 17 DOE National Labs.39 National labs were integral to the creation of the National Virtual Biotechnology Laboratory and the COVID-19 High Performance Computing Consortium. It is also the lead on the Genesis Mission, a national initiative aimed at harnessing AI to accelerate scientific innovation and discovery working with supercomputers, unique datasets across scientific domains, and quantum computing to double the productivity of American innovation within a decade. Three main areas of research will focus on national security, discovery science and energy, The national labs are instrumental in the foundational work that serve as regional engines of economic growth for states and communities across the nation.
For the U.S. to remain at the forefront of science and technology, Congress must consistently sustain and upgrade major scientific facilities that support core research in areas such as bioscience, scientific computing, materials and chemical science, climate science, fusion energy, high energy, and nuclear physics to keep up with global competitiveness.40 Pursuant to the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, Congress agreed on authorization levels for the Office of Science for five years beginning in FY 2023. For FY 2024 the law authorizes $9.5 billion.41 In FY 2026, the office received $8.4 billion or a $160 million increase compared to FY 2025 to continue critical facilities upgrades and support pathbreaking research in emerging areas such as quantum science, fusion and biotechnology while also advancing energy related research and growing a skilled, diverse, and inclusive workforce of researchers, scientists, and professionals.
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $10.06 billion for DOE SC.
Agencies like NIH, NSF, and DOE SC work in concert to advance research in key areas including artificial intelligence and genomics.37 38 The Office of Science is in charge of 10 of the 17 DOE National Labs.39 National labs were integral to the creation of the National Virtual Biotechnology Laboratory and the COVID-19 High Performance Computing Consortium. It is also the lead on the Genesis Mission, a national initiative aimed at harnessing AI to accelerate scientific innovation and discovery working with supercomputers, unique datasets across scientific domains, and quantum computing to double the productivity of American innovation within a decade. Three main areas of research will focus on national security, discovery science and energy, The national labs are instrumental in the foundational work that serve as regional engines of economic growth for states and communities across the nation.
For the U.S. to remain at the forefront of science and technology, Congress must consistently sustain and upgrade major scientific facilities that support core research in areas such as bioscience, scientific computing, materials and chemical science, climate science, fusion energy, high energy, and nuclear physics to keep up with global competitiveness.40 Pursuant to the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, Congress agreed on authorization levels for the Office of Science for five years beginning in FY 2023. For FY 2024 the law authorizes $9.5 billion.41 In FY 2026, the office received $8.4 billion or a $160 million increase compared to FY 2025 to continue critical facilities upgrades and support pathbreaking research in emerging areas such as quantum science, fusion and biotechnology while also advancing energy related research and growing a skilled, diverse, and inclusive workforce of researchers, scientists, and professionals.
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $10.06 billion for DOE SC.
Our agricultural system faces unprecedented challenges, including increased global food and fuel demand, water availability, and training a diverse agricultural workforce.
Agricultural research is key to ensuring food security, economic stability, sustainable development, and a robust middle class. However, public funding for U.S. agricultural research has declined by nearly one-third in the past two decades. At the same time, China has stepped up its spending in this area to more than $10 billion a year - more than double what the U.S. spends.42 China’s issued “No. 1 Central Document” for 2025 identifies a strategic approach to food security and strengthening its agricultural base against growing global challenges. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is the lead federal agency providing extramural funding for food and agricultural sciences. NIFA funds an interdisciplinary research portfolio that brings pioneering science to address complex problems through the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), our nation’s flagship competitive grants program for research, education, and extension projects in the food and agricultural sciences.
AFRI funds agricultural and food sciences research at colleges, universities, and other institutions nationwide. Established by the Farm Bill in 2008, AFRI funding, while not keeping pace with the cost of doing research, has resulted in numerous advances, including new wheat cultivars and novel ways to combat invasive species.43 44 44 AFRI also supports agricultural research priorities announced by the Secretary of Agriculture from human and animal health to increasing profitability and expanding markets for farmers.45
Despite AFRI’s progress – and the need for scientifically informed solutions – the program is appropriated at 62 percent of its authorization level of $700 million at $435 million in FY 2026 (a $10 million cut from FY 2025) leaving hundreds of innovative proposals unfunded. Data from the U.S. Economic Research Service indicates that for every $1 in public investment, U.S. food and agriculture R&D has returned $20 to the American economy.46
According to the AFRI FY 2022-2023 annual review, there was an upward trend in funding representing a more than twofold increase of investment from the 2009 level of $201.5 million to $455 million in FY 2023 demonstrating the demand for the program’s objectives involving land-grant, public, non-land grant universities, private colleges and universities, federal agencies, nonprofits, and individuals and industry. In FY 2022-2023, NIFA received 5,465 applications through the competitive peer review process but only funded 1,515 highly ranked applications (27 percent). However, peer review panels recommended an additional 2,152 proposals rated as Outstanding, High Priority, or Medium Priority that could not be funded due to funding constraints.47
AFRI should be funded at $539 million to fulfill its mission as the leading competitive grants program for agricultural sciences.
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $539 million for AFRI.
Agricultural research is key to ensuring food security, economic stability, sustainable development, and a robust middle class. However, public funding for U.S. agricultural research has declined by nearly one-third in the past two decades. At the same time, China has stepped up its spending in this area to more than $10 billion a year - more than double what the U.S. spends.42 China’s issued “No. 1 Central Document” for 2025 identifies a strategic approach to food security and strengthening its agricultural base against growing global challenges. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is the lead federal agency providing extramural funding for food and agricultural sciences. NIFA funds an interdisciplinary research portfolio that brings pioneering science to address complex problems through the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), our nation’s flagship competitive grants program for research, education, and extension projects in the food and agricultural sciences.
AFRI funds agricultural and food sciences research at colleges, universities, and other institutions nationwide. Established by the Farm Bill in 2008, AFRI funding, while not keeping pace with the cost of doing research, has resulted in numerous advances, including new wheat cultivars and novel ways to combat invasive species.43 44 44 AFRI also supports agricultural research priorities announced by the Secretary of Agriculture from human and animal health to increasing profitability and expanding markets for farmers.45
Despite AFRI’s progress – and the need for scientifically informed solutions – the program is appropriated at 62 percent of its authorization level of $700 million at $435 million in FY 2026 (a $10 million cut from FY 2025) leaving hundreds of innovative proposals unfunded. Data from the U.S. Economic Research Service indicates that for every $1 in public investment, U.S. food and agriculture R&D has returned $20 to the American economy.46
According to the AFRI FY 2022-2023 annual review, there was an upward trend in funding representing a more than twofold increase of investment from the 2009 level of $201.5 million to $455 million in FY 2023 demonstrating the demand for the program’s objectives involving land-grant, public, non-land grant universities, private colleges and universities, federal agencies, nonprofits, and individuals and industry. In FY 2022-2023, NIFA received 5,465 applications through the competitive peer review process but only funded 1,515 highly ranked applications (27 percent). However, peer review panels recommended an additional 2,152 proposals rated as Outstanding, High Priority, or Medium Priority that could not be funded due to funding constraints.47
AFRI should be funded at $539 million to fulfill its mission as the leading competitive grants program for agricultural sciences.
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $539 million for AFRI.
The VA Medical and Prosthetic Research Program improves veterans’ lives through innovations in basic, translational, and rehabilitation research and vital health services. Although primarily focused on the wellbeing of veterans’ health by developing high functioning artificial limbs, state of the art adaptive services for those with hearing and vision loss, electrical stimulation of paralyzed or weak muscles, eye tracking devices for early Parkinson’s detection, and other types of research, all Americans benefit from VA’s collaboration with university partners, non-profits, and private industry to advance research on health care and prevention strategies.48 The research program also enables the VA to recruit and retain a cadre of outstanding physician-scientists to care for our nation’s veterans. The VA Office of Research and Development (ORD) began its work in 1925 and continues to prioritize research focused on the needs of disabled veterans including precision oncology, prosthetics, mental health, and suicide prevention as well as other disease areas. However, in 2025, the Department of Veterans Affairs was disrupted by delays in hiring VA researchers and the termination of VA employees. Pressure from lawmakers allowed a reprieve from a hiring freeze for researchers for 90 days.49
Despite recent increases in appropriations, several areas of VA research remain underfunded, including post-deployment mental health, chronic conditions, and the long-term effects of hazardous materials exposure. These conditions are common among service members. ORD is also implementing an enhanced review process that requires stringent justification and multiple levels of authorization for proposals involving the use of animals in research. This research must be directly related to combat-related illness or injury.
FASEB’s recommendation of $1.2 billion in discretionary funding for the VA Medical and Prosthetic Research Program recognizes the critical role VA research play in advancing Veterans’ health and driving medical innovation nationwide. Sustained funding is essential to preserving VA’s legacy of scientific excellence. This investment will support VA’s core research operations, including investigator-initiated studies, clinical trials, and translational science that directly informs the care Veterans receive across VA medical centers nationwide.
Increased funding will also help VA accelerate research in toxic exposures, mental health conditions, traumatic brain injury, and chronic diseases that disproportionately affect Veterans – areas where VA continues to lead the nation in innovation. With continued investment, VA can remain at the forefront of medical research, delivering breakthroughs that improve Veterans’ lives and strengthen America’s broader research ecosystem.
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $1.2 billion for the VA Medical and Prosthetic Research Program.
Despite recent increases in appropriations, several areas of VA research remain underfunded, including post-deployment mental health, chronic conditions, and the long-term effects of hazardous materials exposure. These conditions are common among service members. ORD is also implementing an enhanced review process that requires stringent justification and multiple levels of authorization for proposals involving the use of animals in research. This research must be directly related to combat-related illness or injury.
FASEB’s recommendation of $1.2 billion in discretionary funding for the VA Medical and Prosthetic Research Program recognizes the critical role VA research play in advancing Veterans’ health and driving medical innovation nationwide. Sustained funding is essential to preserving VA’s legacy of scientific excellence. This investment will support VA’s core research operations, including investigator-initiated studies, clinical trials, and translational science that directly informs the care Veterans receive across VA medical centers nationwide.
Increased funding will also help VA accelerate research in toxic exposures, mental health conditions, traumatic brain injury, and chronic diseases that disproportionately affect Veterans – areas where VA continues to lead the nation in innovation. With continued investment, VA can remain at the forefront of medical research, delivering breakthroughs that improve Veterans’ lives and strengthen America’s broader research ecosystem.
FASEB FY 2027 Recommendation: at least $1.2 billion for the VA Medical and Prosthetic Research Program.