Stand Up for Science challenges NSF grant policy changes

Stand Up for Science filed a public comment opposing the National Science Foundation’s plan to update grant policies to match an unfinished OMB rule. The group says the proposal could weaken civil-rights protections, restrict international collaboration, and increase control over universities through new reporting demands.

Why it matters: - Stand Up for Science says the NSF proposal could add new burdens for grant recipients and universities. - The group argues the changes could affect civil rights obligations, academic freedom, and international research collaboration. - The comment comes as the NSF moves before the OMB rule it is trying to match has been finalized.

What happened: - Stand Up for Science submitted a public comment to the Federal Register on behalf of its Foundation on July 24, 2026. - The comment responds to the National Science Foundation’s proposal to update its grant policies to conform to the OMB’s proposed “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance.” - Stand Up for Science is asking NSF to withdraw the proposal until OMB issues final agency action. - The group also launched an Action Center to help science advocates submit comments on the NSF proposal. - The NSF proposal is open for public comment through August 24, 2026.

The details: - The comment says the OMB rule has not been finalized and has already drawn major opposition from the scientific community. - Cole Donovan, Stand Up for Science’s director of policy, said NSF’s move to “pre-align” its grantmaking rules is unusual given ongoing litigation over related executive orders and the thousands of public comments OMB has not yet addressed. - The filing says the NSF proposal removes requirements tied to statutory civil rights obligations. - The filing says the proposal creates conflicts through restrictions on international collaboration. - The filing says the proposal would expand regulatory control over institutes of higher education through more intensive information collection requirements. - Donovan said using grant-linked information collection to regulate speech and academic freedom goes beyond NSF’s authority. - The comment says the combined effect of the President’s executive orders, the proposed OMB requirements, and the NSF revisions would create additional institutional requirements and significant financial burdens for grant recipients. - Stand Up for Science says the full text of the comment is available on the SUFS Foundation website.

Between the lines: - The challenge is part of a broader fight over how much influence the federal government should have over science funding and university administration. - Stand Up for Science is trying to turn the NSF proposal into a new public-comment campaign, not just a technical rulemaking fight. - Dr. Colette Delawalla, founder and CEO of Stand Up for Science, said the NSF move gives the Trump administration another tool for control and overreach.

What's next: - Stand Up for Science said it will continue hosting live workshops to help people draft Federal Register comments. - Donovan and Delawalla are available for comment. - The NSF will review public comments before moving ahead with any final policy changes. - OMB still has to finalize its own rule before the broader regulatory framework can take full effect.

The bottom line: - Stand Up for Science is pressing NSF to pause its grant policy overhaul until the underlying federal rules are final, arguing the agency is moving too fast on a politically charged and legally uncertain shift.